TheRPGSite

There are three assumptions that were required for the Scientific Revolution to start.

1. The world works off of invariable rational laws that work the same throughout time and space.
2. These rational laws are contingent, not necessary. The world could work off of any set of laws, you need to go out and find which set it works under (through empirical observation and study).
3. These rational laws are consistently discoverable by humans.

Not all cultures believed this. The vast majority didn't. For instance, here's what Buddhism's response to those 3 assumptions would look like.

1. No it doesn't. There is nothing unchanging. Period.
2. See above. There are no rational laws to discover.
3. 'True reality' doesn't exist.

In the worlds you have made or played in, do these three assumptions apply? Are you comfortable playing in a world where they don't? Why or why not?

This is interesting. I think most of the worlds I've GM'd or played in tended to be ones in which those three points were more or less viable in theory. In practice, the meddling of divinities, reality warpers, and the like, was a factor. Also knowledge being power, and power being hoarded got in the way most of the time. That and wanting to play in a relatively static setting, sometimes, for fantasy sword and board.

If there are no rational natural laws, how do people anticipate the future? How do they make decisions about anything? Like, what if I swung a sword at someone, and it made breakfast?

We're talking about fantasy settings right?

I'll assume yes.

Theoretically yes

In practice Magic has usurped the place of Science and people are really busy trying to discover why it works how it works. I mean other than by accident what other way are any new spells created if not?

IIRC there was a product about a magic revolution, don't own it so IDK if it deals with a revolution like what we're talking about.

Given that Magic is real I would posit such a revolution anyway.

Afterwards maybe the same type of inquisitive minds could apply themselves to other endeavors.

Now, if Magic is real why would anyone think that things fall down for any other reason than because the gods will it?
Why would anyone think that a spyglass is anything else than magic?

Interesting questions and would love to see a setting trying to answer them and combine Magic and Science beyond the lazy and tired: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".

But I won't be the one to do it, already too many things cooking and in the backburner.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 10:16:13 PM
If there are no rational natural laws, how do people anticipate the future? How do they make decisions about anything? Like, what if I swung a sword at someone, and it made breakfast?

So, potential bit of reading comprehension failure here. Or else an issue in imagination. No rational laws at all vs no...

1. Invariable Natural Laws


So like if every however many years the universe switched it all up in random fashion, you might have to relearn things a fair bit. Or you might die due to life not being possible, but that wouldn't last forever either. At best you might be able to deduce trends within the current cycle, but if it's seconds and not years then even that's not a given.

2. All Necessary, And Not Contingent Laws

If the laws of physics vary, whether locally or whatever, that can be a problem with deducing them, especially with respect to generalizability. What if reality warpers or local divinities anchor things in place, for instance, as in Mage or the Dresden Files, but that's not even the universal base paradigm? Or what if the laws of physics have a ridiculous number of contingencies and specific things that can happen to change them? Maybe things seem relatively random due to a large number of complications that make deduction difficult. Or what if there are more contingencies than humans can viably comprehend? Ex nihilo, with any number of theoretically possibilities for 'verse size and laws of physics, I'd almost expect an infinite number could well be a thing.

3. Rational Laws Constantly Discoverable By Humans

If the laws are irrational, then logical analysis is bunk to the entire scenario. Likewise, if humans can't consistently make some degree of progress, the scientific revolution probably cannot advance.


Not sure if I interpreted all of this 100%, but should get you a bit closer to the original question's intent.

I assume that the question is for a fantasy setting.

For my fantasy setting, at least some development is possible.  I've laid out a timeline of the rise and fall of cultures and empires as well as major achievements.  This timeline runs up to a pre-industrial revolution level of tech and understanding.  How far beyond that could they go is a good question.

A lot of my setting is built upon various mythologies of how the world was made, how it works, how it's structured, and how a group of god like supernatural being actively operate to keep it running.  Alchemy is very real in a sense that the modern idea of chemistry isn't.  The world is flat and the sun and moon are smaller objects that are temporarily created by magic and set on a trajectory by a supernatural being to provide light, warmth, and guidance.  Bodies of water are literally gateways to a transitional space where you could come out in other place in the world, other worlds, or other planes of existence.  Elves are real and live in a different realm and only come to the human realm by performing forbidden magic rituals. 

If there was possible some form of scientific revolution, it would look radically different than our own. 

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 10:38:33 PM

If the laws of physics vary, whether locally or whatever, that can be a problem with deducing them, especially with respect to generalizability.

I mean, that's what we have now. So then the study of the ways those laws change just becomes part of physics.

Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:06:04 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 10:38:33 PM

If the laws of physics vary, whether locally or whatever, that can be a problem with deducing them, especially with respect to generalizability.

I mean, that's what we have now. So then the study of the ways those laws change just becomes part of physics.

Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science.

The point is that if taken to a greater extent than we have here, (I assume you mean micro vs macro or across dimensions or something) that science/scientific revolution becomes potentially less viable as a development. Unless you actually think the world is held together by reality warpers and that I can find a different set of physics laws in one town as in another. Or that over a matter of years our current understanding of gravity will change not to become more accurate, but because the laws actually shifted, or because Bahamut willed it so.  ;)

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 11:12:32 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:06:04 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 10:38:33 PM

If the laws of physics vary, whether locally or whatever, that can be a problem with deducing them, especially with respect to generalizability.

I mean, that's what we have now. So then the study of the ways those laws change just becomes part of physics.

Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science.

The point is that if taken to a greater extent than we have here, (I assume you mean micro vs macro or across dimensions or something) that science/scientific revolution becomes potentially less viable as a development. Unless you actually think the world is held together by reality warpers and that I can find a different set of physics laws in one town as in another. Or that over a matter of years our current understanding of gravity will change not to become more accurate, but because the laws actually shifted, or because Bahamut willed it so.  ;)

You can't find different natural laws in two sets of towns. But if you could, in a fantasy world, how would anyone survive? How drastically can they change? If the rate is limited, and somewhat understandable, isn't that just a different set of laws?

Like, could you wake up, and suddenly copper oxide is a deadly poison and starts killing people left and right who live near mineral sources? Or is this more like, "What is reality were based on storytelling?" or "What if natural forces could be significantly powerful deities?" In those cases, there are rational natural laws, they are just different than the ones we are used to.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:19:59 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 11:12:32 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:06:04 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 10:38:33 PM

If the laws of physics vary, whether locally or whatever, that can be a problem with deducing them, especially with respect to generalizability.

I mean, that's what we have now. So then the study of the ways those laws change just becomes part of physics.

Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science.

The point is that if taken to a greater extent than we have here, (I assume you mean micro vs macro or across dimensions or something) that science/scientific revolution becomes potentially less viable as a development. Unless you actually think the world is held together by reality warpers and that I can find a different set of physics laws in one town as in another. Or that over a matter of years our current understanding of gravity will change not to become more accurate, but because the laws actually shifted, or because Bahamut willed it so.  ;)

You can't find different natural laws in two sets of towns. But if you could, in a fantasy world, how would anyone survive? How drastically can they change? If the rate is limited, and somewhat understandable, isn't that just a different set of laws?

Like, could you wake up, and suddenly copper oxide is a deadly poison and starts killing people left and right who live near mineral sources? Or is this more like, "What is reality were based on storytelling?" or "What if natural forces could be significantly powerful deities?" In those cases, there are rational natural laws, they are just different than the ones we are used to.

Again, less focus on rational vs "irrational" laws (though when that does go out the window I guess there's really no way of postulating what would or would not be the case, since logic explicitly would not apply within said scenario) and more focus on the specific 3 premises stated, if subverted, making scientific development likely harder and potentially even the scientific revolution nonviable within a societal context.

As for survival or storytelling in such a world, sapient life might well be a localized pocket phenomenon (ex:points of light type setting), or it might just be that variance tends to be relatively nonlethal in nature via DM fiat. Could be interesting narratively, for instance, if every x number of years stuff shifts, too, in that there might be entire cycles where life is nonviable, or alternatively cycles in which life is still viable between shifts, but things start working weird. Would make an upcoming cycle shift very exciting and potentially terrifying to the characters, I guess. These are all just possibilities, but it does show that you can still tell a story or imagine a world where some of those 3 assumptions are gone or bent. In such an instance, I can get, as stated earlier, where the scientific revolution as we now know it might not happen. Heck, it took quite some time to reach where it is within our own world without such complications.

So, as part of this thought experiment, I'll ask, how does culture survive in such a world? Not just a technological revolution, but any sort of stable reservoir of knowledge, culture, or aesthetics?

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 11:33:19 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:19:59 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 11:12:32 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:06:04 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 10:38:33 PM

If the laws of physics vary, whether locally or whatever, that can be a problem with deducing them, especially with respect to generalizability.

I mean, that's what we have now. So then the study of the ways those laws change just becomes part of physics.

Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science.

The point is that if taken to a greater extent than we have here, (I assume you mean micro vs macro or across dimensions or something) that science/scientific revolution becomes potentially less viable as a development. Unless you actually think the world is held together by reality warpers and that I can find a different set of physics laws in one town as in another. Or that over a matter of years our current understanding of gravity will change not to become more accurate, but because the laws actually shifted, or because Bahamut willed it so.  ;)

You can't find different natural laws in two sets of towns. But if you could, in a fantasy world, how would anyone survive? How drastically can they change? If the rate is limited, and somewhat understandable, isn't that just a different set of laws?

Like, could you wake up, and suddenly copper oxide is a deadly poison and starts killing people left and right who live near mineral sources? Or is this more like, "What is reality were based on storytelling?" or "What if natural forces could be significantly powerful deities?" In those cases, there are rational natural laws, they are just different than the ones we are used to.

Again, less focus on rational vs "irrational" laws (though when that does go out the window I guess there's really no way of postulating what would or would not be the case, since logic explicitly would not apply within said scenario) and more focus on the specific 3 premises stated, if subverted, making scientific development likely harder and potentially even the scientific revolution nonviable within a societal context.

As for survival or storytelling in such a world, sapient life might well be a localized pocket phenomenon (ex:points of light type setting), or it might just be that variance tends to be relatively nonlethal in nature via DM fiat. Could be interesting narratively, for instance, if every x number of years stuff shifts, too, in that there might be entire cycles where life is nonviable, or alternatively cycles in which life is still viable between shifts, but things start working weird. Would make an upcoming cycle shift very exciting and potentially terrifying to the characters, I guess. These are all just possibilities, but it does show that you can still tell a story or imagine a world where some of those 3 assumptions are gone or bent. In such an instance, I can get, as stated earlier, where the scientific revolution as we now know it might not happen. Heck, it took quite some time to reach where it is within our own world without such complications.

You could look into the mythology of cultures without these three assumptions to see what it would look like. Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, most pagan mythologies...etc.

I mean, I think the Buddhist perspective on #1 is dharma. That's what dharma is.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 12:13:14 AM
So, as part of this thought experiment, I'll ask, how does culture survive in such a world? Not just a technological revolution, but any sort of stable reservoir of knowledge, culture, or aesthetics?

Yeah, some IRL cultures and religions can kinda answer this question.

That said, could also depend upon the world the DM envisions if we're doing the whole ttrpg framing bit. Might be it varies locally. Might be that it's cultivated or outright dominated by the whims of deities and reality warpers. Could be that it lasts one or more cycles before implosion, and after that it's up to the guesses of archeologists as to what if anything came before. If the shifts are nonlethal and just between localities, could be it lasts and develops just fine for the most part. Or maybe you get pastafarian stuff where everything cultural was created last week, along with large portions of all that is. Or maybe it does whatever it does due to DM fiat. I'm sure you can think of alternative scenarios, but yeah. Plenty of possibilities, I'd suspect.

There are two different things at play, depending on how strict of a line you draw on the question:

1. Is it never possible for a science or even logic to assert itself in the world?  Then there has to be active supernatural factors, in the original sense of "supernatural"--above nature.  Even then, there can be a kind of logic based on trends--e.g. all science becomes anthropology and psychology, with a lot of guesswork and correlations mixed in with the stricter science.

2. It is possible, but highly unlikely, for science to assert itself over a much greater period than we experienced in our own history. This is much easier to produce, especially if you don't have things like immortal elves and magic as an alternative to science. 

Even in our own history, there is really no consistent answer to how far back we were set by the downfall of the Roman empire or various chaotic endings to Chinese dynasties or other such.  Or maybe the churn was necessary for later growth.  Arguably, the worst hits of the bubonic plague in Western Europe set back the Enlightenment 300 years, though the changes in values of labor may have been necessary for changing attitudes that led to exploration. The Little Ice Age was devastating, with whole communities wiped out.  How does Central Europe go in the medieval period without all the various invasions?  That's no magic at all--just people and nature doing their thing.  Nor is it limited to those periods.  See Bronze Age Collapse.  Major Krakatoa-like eruptions can cause a world-wide, decade-long setback. Throw more of those in the mix, eventually you get one at the wrong time that combines with other factors to be even worse.

In my own recent settings, it's the second option.  It's theoretically possible for science to assert itself in the modern sense of the term, at least in some aspects, eventually. Practically, it's never going to happen for thousands of years.  I've got more than a fair share of people and nature doing their thing, along with monsters, magic, and rather restrained and reserved deities doing their thing. Elves rarely live longer than 150 years.  With communities coming and going, a lot of places only have myths and legends for their own areas even 200-400 years ago.  That's a lot of shake up. 

Then on top of that, I've made magic have exactly one unexplained "subnatural" characteristic:  Magical effects are broadly reproducible, but every bit of magic comes from a personal connection to a source, and that connection is never exactly the same.  You can learn 2 +2 = 4 and teach it to someone else.  It works the same for them as it does for you.  You can learn to shoot a bit of fire from your fingertip.  Others can too, and it appears to be very similar.  But you can't really teach it to them, most of the time, partly because you don't fully understand how you do it, and partly because how you do it is not the same as how everyone else does it.  It's reproducible for you personally in the particulars but only reproducible for others in the abstract, and in occasional correlations, if you meet enough people who can do it.  Giving some stability and several centuries to explore it, someone might eventually get the answers to that, but if anyone has up until now, they've died in the turmoil before it could get shared around.  (Or maybe they kept it to themselves as a source of power.)  Is it biology, DNA, magical blood lines, environment, diet, god-given talent?  No one knows, and very few have the time to explore the question.

Then for the cherry on top, I threw in a bit of physics changes that I know roughly how they work, but aren't explained in the game world.  Making steel isn't possible without magic, for example.  And since the magic is personal, making steel is too. There is some scientific advancement possible in this area, with a lot of effort. The changes are mainly to give the world a fantastical feel and explain how any advanced equipment and processes can happen at all in a world with so much churn.

In setting with Magic - scientific revolution could happen sure - especially if magic is nor reliable enough for technology, but it's quite possible scientism as philosophy would be impossible, since magic and gods would be observably real, but also due to sentient nature (magic exist only with magician not as some space energy to be harness by machines - if it's space energy there is no reason to call it magic) it cannot be submited to real empirical evidence - since free agents can always twist results in unpredictable manner, and you have no methodology to call bullshit on them.

QuoteNot all cultures believed this. The vast majority didn't. For instance, here's what Buddhism's response to those 3 assumptions would look like.

1. No it doesn't. There is nothing unchanging. Period.
2. See above. There are no rational laws to discover.
3. 'True reality' doesn't exist.

that does not sound as any form of buddhism I read about.
in Buddhism reality is very much real - but SELF is not real but emergent illusion without own being.
that's why buddhism in many cases have very clear rational notions of what to do to abandon illusions.

QuoteNow, if Magic is real why would anyone think that things fall down for any other reason than because the gods will it?
Why would anyone think that a spyglass is anything else than magic?

Because any shmuck can do spyglass given technology - while you cannot do magic without attuning your very own personal mind to CELESTIAL STAR HIERARCHY for instance.
Unless magic is weird form of energy in which case basically it should be possible to scientifically research it and finally build machines to harness it. So all those kinds of magick should not count as supernatural - but merely invented natural and be suspectible to empirism.

In my Fantasy RPG setting:

The planet that the game takes place on is a giant psychic battery.  So the universe works like our own universe but the local region has magic that can counteract the natural laws of the universe, thus you get "magic users" who can cast fireballs from their hands and fly. 

About 1% of humanoids are capable of learning magic.  That is to say, they can train their minds to recite the formulae that makes spells happen.  "Spells" being one-time magical effects. 

Since the universe woks normally you can have a scientifice revolution. But there are powerful entities (gods, demons, etc), and magical societies, and priesthoods who like having a monopoly on power. 

Since smart people tend to become wizards and clerics, why would a smart person take the time to invent an arquebus when they can just study magic and cast magic mise or fireball?  Why experiment with medicine when cure wounds and cure disease exists.  And how would they even know to study science when there are people healing the sick, raising the dead, and blowing up towns with fireballs?  Magic, though uncommon, is the path of least resistance. 

Since Humans and other humanoids migrated to this planet from across the stars, science was once a thing.  So there are residual low tech inventions like water clocks and spring powered machinery, and catapults. 

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 01, 2023, 05:32:49 PM
In setting with Magic - scientific revolution could happen sure - especially if magic is nor reliable enough for technology, but it's quite possible scientism as philosophy would be impossible, since magic and gods would be observably real, but also due to sentient nature (magic exist only with magician not as some space energy to be harness by machines - if it's space energy there is no reason to call it magic) it cannot be submited to real empirical evidence - since free agents can always twist results in unpredictable manner, and you have no methodology to call bullshit on them.

QuoteNot all cultures believed this. The vast majority didn't. For instance, here's what Buddhism's response to those 3 assumptions would look like.

1. No it doesn't. There is nothing unchanging. Period.
2. See above. There are no rational laws to discover.
3. 'True reality' doesn't exist.

that does not sound as any form of buddhism I read about.
in Buddhism reality is very much real - but SELF is not real but emergent illusion without own being.
that's why buddhism in many cases have very clear rational notions of what to do to abandon illusions.

QuoteNow, if Magic is real why would anyone think that things fall down for any other reason than because the gods will it?
Why would anyone think that a spyglass is anything else than magic?

Because any shmuck can do spyglass given technology - while you cannot do magic without attuning your very own personal mind to CELESTIAL STAR HIERARCHY for instance.
Unless magic is weird form of energy in which case basically it should be possible to scientifically research it and finally build machines to harness it. So all those kinds of magick should not count as supernatural - but merely invented natural and be suspectible to empirism.

Must be why the "native americans" were amazed at mirrors and telescopes...

Must  be why seeing photographic cameras like soul stealing magic was a thing

Must be why cargo cults are a thing.

Not any schmuck can make a telescope, and said tech was kept a state secret IRL for a long while. Why would those who know how spread the tech? Assuming they didn't think it was all part of a magic ritual.

You're failing at seeing things as someone living in such a world.

QuoteMust be why the "native americans" were amazed at mirrors and telescopes...

Must  be why seeing photographic cameras like soul stealing magic was a thing

Must be why cargo cults are a thing.

Not any schmuck can make a telescope, and said tech was kept a state secret IRL for a long while. Why would those who know how spread the tech? Assuming they didn't think it was all part of a magic ritual.

You're failing at seeing things as someone living in such a world.

Yeah but that's not the point I was making. Sure you can trick someone not knowing your tricks they are more than in reality. That's true.
But ultimately technology is operating on matter, not esoteric art of mind. Ability to pass it around is way way way higher (whether supernatural art works at all or not).

I can teach wild tribesman that pushing button on Polaroid will lead to photo, but generally most magical theories in fiction and rl, does not assume you can do something as easy and mass produced to magically conjure such image. Now if in your world magicians are 15% of population, and image conjuring artifacts that muggles can use by pushing button are common... then sure, but it's rare situation and not how magical arts are commonly seen.

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 01, 2023, 08:56:30 PM

QuoteMust be why the "native americans" were amazed at mirrors and telescopes...

Must  be why seeing photographic cameras like soul stealing magic was a thing

Must be why cargo cults are a thing.

Not any schmuck can make a telescope, and said tech was kept a state secret IRL for a long while. Why would those who know how spread the tech? Assuming they didn't think it was all part of a magic ritual.

You're failing at seeing things as someone living in such a world.

Yeah but that's not the point I was making. Sure you can trick someone not knowing your tricks they are more than in reality. That's true.
But ultimately technology is operating on matter, not esoteric art of mind. Ability to pass it around is way way way higher (whether supernatural art works at all or not).

I can teach wild tribesman that pushing button on Polaroid will lead to photo, but generally most magical theories in fiction and rl, does not assume you can do something as easy and mass produced to magically conjure such image. Now if in your world magicians are 15% of population, and image conjuring artifacts that muggles can use by pushing button are common... then sure, but it's rare situation and not how magical arts are commonly seen.

Sure, tech isn't magic, that's not the argument we're having, the argument is: Would people in a world where magic is real and the gods intervene see a spyglass as tech or not?

I say they would see it as a magical ritual, so no discovery of the laws behind it would be made.

You're again inserting your IRL self into the game world.

Quote from: MeganovaStella on November 30, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
There are three assumptions that were required for the Scientific Revolution to start.

1. The world works off of invariable rational laws that work the same throughout time and space.
2. These rational laws are contingent, not necessary. The world could work off of any set of laws, you need to go out and find which set it works under (through empirical observation and study).
3. These rational laws are consistently discoverable by humans.

...

In the worlds you have made or played in, do these three assumptions apply? Are you comfortable playing in a world where they don't? Why or why not?

Kind of two questions there. "Are these assumptions valid in the setting?" and "Do the people in the setting believe them?". I'm not sure from the phrasing which is being asked.

The former question is more interesting to me:
--The majority of fantasy settings arguably violate the first condition. As soon as you introduce the incredibly common trope of time running differently in Fairyland, you've broken it. How many fantasy settings include some variation of "cold fire", or even just immortality (which violates the laws of thermodynamics)? That said, I'm not sure that necessarily matters. To use (and probably butcher) a scientific analogy: As far as I understand it, Newtonian physics are not actually accurate in all times and places (as compared to Einsteinian or quantum physics), but they're good enough to allow for a huge amount of scientific progress. Likewise, as long as the laws of time and space are "reliable enough" in the fantasy setting, the same progress is possible. Even if water has a different boiling point in the Dimension of Dread or whatever, you can still invent the steam engine on the material plane. You get the idea. Honestly, given that most fantasy settings operate this way, it can be a little immersion breaking that they're often locked in a single state of progress. I'm not an expert on Faerun, but from the outside it appears to have been in technological stasis for millennia.
--The second assumption is essentially just a truism, so it's only really relevant to the question of whether people believe it.
--The third assumption kind of gets you into the realm of the Lovecraftian. A hallmark of "cosmic horror" and related subgenres is that the laws which govern reality are not discoverable and/or comprehensible by humans. Personally, I find that makes for a more interesting fantasy setting, but even then the scientific mindset isn't impossible. There's lots of fun to be had with stories about the rational man running face-first into that which defies understanding. Bloodborne and Indiana Jones both come to mind.

Regarding the subtopic which has risen around whether a fantasy setting would realistically experience a scientific revolution, I think some progress would be inevitable, but the pace is a question of cost-benefit:

If magic is readily available, reliable, and well-enough understood to be codified into an academic discipline, I suspect that would stifle technological progress, simply because magic would present a path of less resistance. Scientific experimentation is time-consuming and expensive, and is therefore usually the province of the idle rich, or at least done under their patronage. You can imagine that being less appetizing when you could easily pay a wizard to produce the same results. Ironically what scientific progress you would get would probably come from wizards themselves, they being the best educated people with the most free time on their hands. That image tracks pretty well with the most popular official D&D settings (Krynn, Ravenloft and Eberron being possible exceptions), probably because it matches the implied setting created by the D&D rules.

On the other hand, if magic is the province of a select and secretive few, ill-understood even by it's practitioners, and comes at a significant personal cost, you probably get more technological innovation, because the demand is still there. Warhammer Fantasy's Old World is a possible example, though I think Discworld might be a better one. In the early books, inventions like the pocket-watch and camera are powered magically, but later on it sees the non-magical invention of the firearm, printing press, submarine, semaphore, and eventually the steam engine. Discworld is a setting that doesn't take itself all that seriously, but I don't think it's a coincidence that it's a setting where one has to be born a wizard, heavy magic use presents significant risks, and what wizards there are a cloistered set with a culture of not interfering with the common people.

In my setting what most call magic is actually science (more accurately sufficiently advanced technology).

The barbarians of the wilds can produce technology at around AD 900-1300 levels.

The most civilized regions can produce technology at around AD 1750-1850 levels.

The Mechanist class is able to create small amounts of Pre-Cataclysm tech which is basically pre-FTL sci-fi.

The Mage class is able cargo cult its way through the use of Precursor tech (basically magic accessed through programs running on a global nanocloud using verbal, somatic and implement-based interfaces), but has only limited understanding of its foundations (ex. they know that line 138 of the "fireball spell" code has to be there for it to work... they don't know WHY line 138 has to be there).

Mystics instinctively tap into something that seems to transcend even the Precursor tech... (ie. it seems to manipulate the same forces the nanocloud does, but they don't require the nanocloud interface to do so). This ability cannot be trained and seems to manifest at random in the population (whereas Mechanists and Mages derive their abilities through study and access to resources).

To the average person, Mechanists, Mages and Mystics all use magic, but most can understand that Mechanists are able to produce things using otherwise lost science, and some understand Mages are using really lost science. No one understands how Mystics are able to do what they do and those who run society are generally distrustful of them since they have no way to control who gets access to the power of a mystic.

Is a scientific revolution possible in my world?

What world am I running or playing? For the sake of conversation, let's pick something published that people can look up.

Maybe the world is Toril or Golarion, maybe it's Oerth, perhaps it's Krynn. Well the game I'm in is some kind of medieval fantasy game. A scientific revolution makes the world stop being a medieval fantasy world. Regardless of whether a scientific revolution is possible, we're not doing it.

Maybe the world is a galaxy far far away, a Federation starship in the late 23rd century, or mid-2000s Seattle after the Sixth Age has begun and the magic has come back. Those are science fiction or cyberpunk settings with vastly superior technology to what we have today. The question of a scientific revolution is moot. It's already happened.

Maybe the world is Deadlands. That's late 1800s North America, which is currently undergoing a scientific revolution as part of the setting.

These are all very different worlds, because that's what happens as a result of a scientific revolution.

It seems to me that this question is only applicable to a fantasy setting, or something like it. If I'm playing or running such a game, I've already made the decision regarding my interest in a scientific revolution. So I guess my answer is that I don't care if a scientific revolution is possible. If I did, I'd play something else instead.

QuoteSure, tech isn't magic, that's not the argument we're having, the argument is: Would people in a world where magic is real and the gods intervene see a spyglass as tech or not?

I say they would see it as a magical ritual, so no discovery of the laws behind it would be made.

Depends of how divine miracles and rituals are performed.
People were using tools for generations, without considering them magical on itself (although not offending God of Crafts was always promoted).
So technology gonna work anyway - now of course most of technology is older than scientific organised theories.
To that I'd say - like from what I read plenty real world magicians were trying to understand RULES behind magic. There were theories. There were metaphysical concepts to explain percieved reality. Ergo philosophy - mother of science. Pure utilitarism was never enough for nerds.

To answer the original question - my game-world has relatively active divinity in it. The emperor is directly descended from the Sun God who founded the empire. There are frequent sacred locations that are very minor deities in their own right.

So for mortals, scientific inquiry isn't a useful tool. It's more effective to ask the gods and spirits how things works. If the gods and spirits don't like you, then it doesn't matter whether you try scientific experiments - because they will mess with the experiments to trip you up. (This would be like the sophon in the novel The Three Body Problem. If there is a powerful intelligence that is watching as you try experiments and will mess with the results, then scientific process can't work.)

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 02, 2023, 08:04:56 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 01, 2023, 09:34:52 PM
Sure, tech isn't magic, that's not the argument we're having, the argument is: Would people in a world where magic is real and the gods intervene see a spyglass as tech or not?

I say they would see it as a magical ritual, so no discovery of the laws behind it would be made.

Depends of how divine miracles and rituals are performed.
People were using tools for generations, without considering them magical on itself (although not offending God of Crafts was always promoted).
So technology gonna work anyway - now of course most of technology is older than scientific organised theories.
To that I'd say - like from what I read plenty real world magicians were trying to understand RULES behind magic. There were theories. There were metaphysical concepts to explain percieved reality. Ergo philosophy - mother of science. Pure utilitarism was never enough for nerds.

Yeah. Magicians have always tried to figure out how magic works. A lot of things that are now called science were once called magic. People tried to figure them out, but often they didn't have the background or process to understand what they were studying.

RPG systems tend to distinguish between "science" as things that work in the real world, and "magic" as things that only work in the fictional world. But of course, in the fictional world, they don't know about the real world - so that dividing line makes no sense. Magic and science would be one discipline ("natural philosophy") divided into appropriate sub-fields like biology, astronomy, divination, etc.

QuoteRPG systems tend to distinguish between "science" as things that work in the real world, and "magic" as things that only work in the fictional world. But of course, in the fictional world, they don't know about the real world - so that dividing line makes no sense. Magic and science would be one discipline ("natural philosophy") divided into appropriate sub-fields like biology, astronomy, divination, etc.

Well that depends - for instance in Faerun you gonna have whole entity called Weave any all energy-working using it gonna be called Magick. So there is separation by the source.
Of course Magick as weird energy is very modern perspective came from XIX century pseudoscience of spiritualists who tried to find non-mystical explanations, and only rarely in actual magick practices weird energy is a thing - there is reason term mana came from Polynesians - relatively obscure people in grand scheme of things.

I guess certain form of ki- or prana, as vital energies living organisms can harness could work in that way - though AFAIK it was basically always old, not obsolete idea of separate specific energy responsible for living beings being well ALIVE.

QuoteSo for mortals, scientific inquiry isn't a useful tool. It's more effective to ask the gods and spirits how things works. If the gods and spirits don't like you, then it doesn't matter whether you try scientific experiments - because they will mess with the experiments to trip you up. (This would be like the sophon in the novel The Three Body Problem. If there is a powerful intelligence that is watching as you try experiments and will mess with the results, then scientific process can't work.)

That's also while all this attempts to say God, gods, spirits or faerie are not real because experiemtns does not show them are philosophically bullshit. You cannot believably experiment if sentient subject can interfere - that's also grand problem with psychology.

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 03, 2023, 07:50:51 PM

QuoteRPG systems tend to distinguish between "science" as things that work in the real world, and "magic" as things that only work in the fictional world. But of course, in the fictional world, they don't know about the real world - so that dividing line makes no sense. Magic and science would be one discipline ("natural philosophy") divided into appropriate sub-fields like biology, astronomy, divination, etc.

Well that depends - for instance in Faerun you gonna have whole entity called Weave any all energy-working using it gonna be called Magick. So there is separation by the source.
Of course Magick as weird energy is very modern perspective came from XIX century pseudoscience of spiritualists who tried to find non-mystical explanations, and only rarely in actual magick practices weird energy is a thing - there is reason term mana came from Polynesians - relatively obscure people in grand scheme of things.

I guess certain form of ki- or prana, as vital energies living organisms can harness could work in that way - though AFAIK it was basically always old, not obsolete idea of separate specific energy responsible for living beings being well ALIVE.

QuoteSo for mortals, scientific inquiry isn't a useful tool. It's more effective to ask the gods and spirits how things works. If the gods and spirits don't like you, then it doesn't matter whether you try scientific experiments - because they will mess with the experiments to trip you up. (This would be like the sophon in the novel The Three Body Problem. If there is a powerful intelligence that is watching as you try experiments and will mess with the results, then scientific process can't work.)

That's also while all this attempts to say God, gods, spirits or faerie are not real because experiemtns does not show them are philosophically bullshit. You cannot believably experiment if sentient subject can interfere - that's also grand problem with psychology.

There you go again mixing the real world with the game world.

What is gravity? The deformation of space by the mass of an object. In the real world.

Now, let's postulate a world where the gods intervene everyday, where you can witness clerics healing by impossing hands, where wizards cast fireballs, where druids wildshape, where if a werewolf bites you you become one too, where vampires are real, demons exist, so do djinns and other supernatural entities.

Can you imagine such a world?

Now, in such a world the answer to why the apple falls from the tree is because the gods will it. Why would anyone doubt such an explanation? Even if in the game world gravity works just like in ours.

It's the same reason why in such a world there can't be atheists, in such a world you KNOW the gods are real, it's not a matter of faith. Go ask the atheist Grim Jimm.

Isaac Newton was a religionist, a magician, and a scientist, all at once.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 05, 2023, 12:52:22 AM
Isaac Newton was a religionist, a magician, and a scientist, all at once.

Point of order. You say "magician," but at that time the field of Chymistry (i.e. alchemy on its way to becoming chemistry) was a part of what were known as the natural magics (the precursors of astronomy, biology, botony, chemistry and physics; a literal example of Clarke's inverse law; any sufficiently studied magic becomes science).

Sir Newton was not an occultist attempting to summon up or bargain with spirits when not working on optics, gravity and calculus; he was also a proto-chemist.

QuoteThere you go again mixing the real world with the game world.

What is gravity? The deformation of space by the mass of an object. In the real world.

Now, let's postulate a world where the gods intervene everyday, where you can witness clerics healing by impossing hands, where wizards cast fireballs, where druids wildshape, where if a werewolf bites you you become one too, where vampires are real, demons exist, so do djinns and other supernatural entities.

Can you imagine such a world?

Now, in such a world the answer to why the apple falls from the tree is because the gods will it. Why would anyone doubt such an explanation? Even if in the game world gravity works just like in ours.

It's the same reason why in such a world there can't be atheists, in such a world you KNOW the gods are real, it's not a matter of faith. Go ask the atheist Grim Jimm.

Because imagine this people believed in divine interventions for centuries and it did not stop them from seeking patter in nature.
Anti-logic universes are rarely. Nightmarish whimsical where reality is in constant flux is rare. Generally speaking in our world or in fantasy large chunk of nature of reality is solid and even gods cannot wantonly (or don't want as their is Cosmic Order) change them. And if people notices order, when they notices patterns, then clear realization is that Divine Work is orderly, solid, logical and therefore it's worthy to understand how gods organised world. And that's how natural philosophy starts, and it's mother of science.

Sure most people would not care about gravity, but most people don't care about intricacies of science nowadays. Normies are normies - it's elites who births wizards and philosophers, priests and engineers, scientists and occultists. And there is no reason for those elites to ditch natural philosophy because 99% of reality is still works according to it. Vampire may be perished, but gravity is gonna stuck with us for a long time :P

QuotePoint of order. You say "magician," but at that time the field of Chymistry (i.e. alchemy on its way to becoming chemistry) was a part of what were known as the natural magics (the precursors of astronomy, biology, botony, chemistry and physics; a literal example of Clarke's inverse law; any sufficiently studied magic becomes science).

Sir Newton was not an occultist attempting to summon up or bargain with spirits when not working on optics, gravity and calculus; he was also a proto-chemist.

Correct but also ancient term magician and magic is more linked to discovering secrets of Cosmos, than to mere bargaining with spirits. Magi were philosopher-priests, serious business.
Of course in practice as many actual occultists in history shows you can be religious (most of right-hand occult traditions seen itself as esoteric elite of Christendom), magician in spiritual sense (we force demons to do our bidding, by secret equation revealed by God to King Solomon, therefore decreasing demonic influence on normal people) and scientists (we discover healing potency of herbs by scrupulous research). Those general positions are not necessarily opposite.

Of course for Newton who was Protestant Unitarian with some deistic practices probably spirit-working would be nonsensical and I agree in practical sense (but fantasy worlds can work differently).

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 06, 2023, 11:30:19 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2023, 08:04:18 PM
Now, let's postulate a world where the gods intervene everyday, where you can witness clerics healing by impossing hands, where wizards cast fireballs, where druids wildshape, where if a werewolf bites you you become one too, where vampires are real, demons exist, so do djinns and other supernatural entities.

Can you imagine such a world?

Now, in such a world the answer to why the apple falls from the tree is because the gods will it. Why would anyone doubt such an explanation? Even if in the game world gravity works just like in ours.

Because imagine this people believed in divine interventions for centuries and it did not stop them from seeking patter in nature.
Anti-logic universes are rarely. Nightmarish whimsical where reality is in constant flux is rare. Generally speaking in our world or in fantasy large chunk of nature of reality is solid and even gods cannot wantonly (or don't want as their is Cosmic Order) change them. And if people notices order, when they notices patterns, then clear realization is that Divine Work is orderly, solid, logical and therefore it's worthy to understand how gods organised world. And that's how natural philosophy starts, and it's mother of science.

I agree with Wrath of God here. In real history, Isaac Newton who discovered gravity was very much doing so because he believed that gravity was God's law, and it was important to study God's law to appreciate the glory of His Creation. Functionally, it's the same thing for a theist to seek out the gods' laws as for an atheist to seek out the laws of a godless universe. They're both looking for falsifiable patterns to how things work.

The important thing about the discovery of gravity isn't the atheist explanation for it (which Newton would have opposed). It's the discovery of the pattern that how the planets move that could be the same for all bodies in the universe.

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 05, 2023, 08:27:06 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 05, 2023, 12:52:22 AM
Isaac Newton was a religionist, a magician, and a scientist, all at once.

Point of order. You say "magician," but at that time the field of Chymistry (i.e. alchemy on its way to becoming chemistry) was a part of what were known as the natural magics (the precursors of astronomy, biology, botony, chemistry and physics; a literal example of Clarke's inverse law; any sufficiently studied magic becomes science).

Sir Newton was not an occultist attempting to summon up or bargain with spirits when not working on optics, gravity and calculus; he was also a proto-chemist.

Alchemy was in some sense proto-chemistry, but it was pursued with a very different methodology and purpose. Alchemists - including Newton - had a personal relationship with the formulae they were mixing in search of spiritual enlightenment. They saw themselves as trying to unlock secrets of the ancients. They published their findings as coded poetry talking about the green lion, the two-headed hermaphrodite, and other symbols - which Newton read and annotated though he didn't publish his own such works.

This overlaps with scientific findings, but there are major differences. Newton did a lot of experimentation with chemicals, but for him most of that was very private and personal work, in keeping with alchemical tradition.

Quote from: jhkim on December 06, 2023, 12:23:57 PM

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 06, 2023, 11:30:19 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2023, 08:04:18 PM
Now, let's postulate a world where the gods intervene everyday, where you can witness clerics healing by impossing hands, where wizards cast fireballs, where druids wildshape, where if a werewolf bites you you become one too, where vampires are real, demons exist, so do djinns and other supernatural entities.

Can you imagine such a world?

Now, in such a world the answer to why the apple falls from the tree is because the gods will it. Why would anyone doubt such an explanation? Even if in the game world gravity works just like in ours.

Because imagine this people believed in divine interventions for centuries and it did not stop them from seeking patter in nature.
Anti-logic universes are rarely. Nightmarish whimsical where reality is in constant flux is rare. Generally speaking in our world or in fantasy large chunk of nature of reality is solid and even gods cannot wantonly (or don't want as their is Cosmic Order) change them. And if people notices order, when they notices patterns, then clear realization is that Divine Work is orderly, solid, logical and therefore it's worthy to understand how gods organised world. And that's how natural philosophy starts, and it's mother of science.

I agree with Wrath of God here. In real history, Isaac Newton who discovered gravity was very much doing so because he believed that gravity was God's law, and it was important to study God's law to appreciate the glory of His Creation. Functionally, it's the same thing for a theist to seek out the gods' laws as for an atheist to seek out the laws of a godless universe. They're both looking for falsifiable patterns to how things work.

The important thing about the discovery of gravity isn't the atheist explanation for it (which Newton would have opposed). It's the discovery of the pattern that how the planets move that could be the same for all bodies in the universe.

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 05, 2023, 08:27:06 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 05, 2023, 12:52:22 AM
Isaac Newton was a religionist, a magician, and a scientist, all at once.

Point of order. You say "magician," but at that time the field of Chymistry (i.e. alchemy on its way to becoming chemistry) was a part of what were known as the natural magics (the precursors of astronomy, biology, botony, chemistry and physics; a literal example of Clarke's inverse law; any sufficiently studied magic becomes science).

Sir Newton was not an occultist attempting to summon up or bargain with spirits when not working on optics, gravity and calculus; he was also a proto-chemist.

Alchemy was in some sense proto-chemistry, but it was pursued with a very different methodology and purpose. Alchemists - including Newton - had a personal relationship with the formulae they were mixing in search of spiritual enlightenment. They saw themselves as trying to unlock secrets of the ancients. They published their findings as coded poetry talking about the green lion, the two-headed hermaphrodite, and other symbols - which Newton read and annotated though he didn't publish his own such works.

This overlaps with scientific findings, but there are major differences. Newton did a lot of experimentation with chemicals, but for him most of that was very private and personal work, in keeping with alchemical tradition.

As a Christian, you're both wrong, and you're both falling for the same trap: Inserting yourself with all of your IRL preconceptions into the Game World.

Newton (or anybody else for that matter) NEVER saw a cleric heal an amputated leg, never saw ANY of the vaunted Alchemists cast fireball, he was operating on FAITH.

But in a world where gods walk the earth or at the very least intervene daily in the affairs of mortals, where magic is very much real, where supernatural beings like Dragons, Immortal Elves, long lived Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc. not only exist but the common man has to deal with them, where in your lifetime a battle between the forces of good and evil took place close enough so you could hear or see it, where your uncle and his family the next town over got murdered by werewolves.

In such a world faith isn't neccesary and wouldn't exist, people would ACTUALLY KNOW the gods are real.

From this it follows that if the common explanation for something people don't understand (as it usually is) is because the gods will it. Who would doubt it? Why? There's no reason to do so.

Newton didn't discover anything in a vacuum, he was building on stuff others did before him. When he couldn't explain one aspect of the planets moving what did he do? "God's Will" that was his answer.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 02:10:54 PM
As a Christian, you're both wrong, and you're both falling for the same trap: Inserting yourself with all of your IRL preconceptions into the Game World.

Newton (or anybody else for that matter) NEVER saw a cleric heal an amputated leg, never saw ANY of the vaunted Alchemists cast fireball, he was operating on FAITH.

But in a world where gods walk the earth or at the very least intervene daily in the affairs of mortals, where magic is very much real, where supernatural beings like Dragons, Immortal Elves, long lived Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc. not only exist but the common man has to deal with them, where in your lifetime a battle between the forces of good and evil took place close enough so you could hear or see it, where your uncle and his family the next town over got murdered by werewolves.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 02:10:54 PM
From this it follows that if the common explanation for something people don't understand (as it usually is) is because the gods will it. Who would doubt it? Why? There's no reason to do so.

I think you're implying that "because the gods will it" means that people wouldn't try to understand further. If so, you're asserting a contradiction here based on your real-life preconceptions. Logically, there is no contradiction between "gravity is because the gods will it" and "gravity is described by a force proportional to both masses and inversely proportional to distance".

In the real world, magic and theology are opposed to scientific methodology because the real world doesn't have fireballs. One can't experimentally verify real-world magic or theology. However, if fireballs were real, then magicians would absolutely study and experiment and document their work to find out what process produced the most powerful fireball. Clerics would carefully document what exactly their god supports and how to maximize healing.

In a world with fireballs, magic and science would be the same thing, and all would be experimented with and could potentially be investigated scientifically.

Quote from: jhkim on December 06, 2023, 05:54:49 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 02:10:54 PM
As a Christian, you're both wrong, and you're both falling for the same trap: Inserting yourself with all of your IRL preconceptions into the Game World.

Newton (or anybody else for that matter) NEVER saw a cleric heal an amputated leg, never saw ANY of the vaunted Alchemists cast fireball, he was operating on FAITH.

But in a world where gods walk the earth or at the very least intervene daily in the affairs of mortals, where magic is very much real, where supernatural beings like Dragons, Immortal Elves, long lived Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc. not only exist but the common man has to deal with them, where in your lifetime a battle between the forces of good and evil took place close enough so you could hear or see it, where your uncle and his family the next town over got murdered by werewolves.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 02:10:54 PM
From this it follows that if the common explanation for something people don't understand (as it usually is) is because the gods will it. Who would doubt it? Why? There's no reason to do so.

I think you're implying that "because the gods will it" means that people wouldn't try to understand further. If so, you're asserting a contradiction here based on your real-life preconceptions. Logically, there is no contradiction between "gravity is because the gods will it" and "gravity is described by a force proportional to both masses and inversely proportional to distance".

In the real world, magic and theology are opposed to scientific methodology because the real world doesn't have fireballs. One can't experimentally verify real-world magic or theology. However, if fireballs were real, then magicians would absolutely study and experiment and document their work to find out what process produced the most powerful fireball. Clerics would carefully document what exactly their god supports and how to maximize healing.

In a world with fireballs, magic and science would be the same thing, and all would be experimented with and could potentially be investigated scientifically.

Now you're trying to change the argument.

I said in my first post in the thread that a "revolution" would be magical not scientific. Of course if you now change the definitions so they are one and the same...

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 10:24:47 PM
Now you're trying to change the argument.

I said in my first post in the thread that a "revolution" would be magical not scientific. Of course if you now change the definitions so they are one and the same...

Science =/= Technology.

Science is the formalized study of the cosmos through the methods of hypothesis, tests with controlled variables yielding measurable results. As such, it is as applicable to "magic" as it is to real-world processes.

At this point I'll presume you're familiar with Clarke's law; Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. The same is true in reverse, any sufficiently understood magic is indistinguishable from technology.

Magic and the Supernatural are only ever so until you know how it works. Once you understand it, it might be exotic, but it is a natural process.

Flight was a magical thing, until we studied it enough to understand the processes involved and developed light enough materials and strong enough engines to achieve it.

Further, there is nothing that is supernatural to God. He understands everything perfectly and so the process by which He created the heavens and earth and all that dwells within it is a perfectly rational and natural process (the only reason that wouldn't be science is because He determined what the rules of nature were so He has no need to use science to discover them).

Basically, what is Magic and what is Technology is entirely subjective to the observer. A steel sword is magic to a caveman, an airplane is magic to a medieval, teleportation would be magic to us. To the person who built the sword, the airplane or the teleporter it's just technology.

And the process used to achieve each was some variation of trial and error to understand what was and was not possible. Science is just the formalization of that process of trial and error and something akin to it would certainly exist anywhere that a process was repeatable enough to useful.

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 07, 2023, 08:49:06 AM
And the process used to achieve each was some variation of trial and error to understand what was and was not possible. Science is just the formalization of that process of trial and error and something akin to it would certainly exist anywhere that a process was repeatable enough to useful.

Something "akin to" science would exist - but the specific question was about the Scientific Revolution, which was much more specific than just trial and error. It is a formal process of hypothesis, experimentation, peer review, and publication in a standardized format.

I mentioned that in my game world, there are benevolent gods and spirits that know a lot more than mortals, and they are generally dominant. So I don't think that a Scientific Revolution would happen culturally - because mortals could gain accurate knowledge about how things work without science. In a world with antagonistic gods, they might disrupt a Scientific Revolution if they disliked it. But there's space in fantasy worlds where a Scientific Revolution might happen, depending on what the gods are like and what they do.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 10:24:47 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 06, 2023, 05:54:49 PM
In the real world, magic and theology are opposed to scientific methodology because the real world doesn't have fireballs. One can't experimentally verify real-world magic or theology. However, if fireballs were real, then magicians would absolutely study and experiment and document their work to find out what process produced the most powerful fireball. Clerics would carefully document what exactly their god supports and how to maximize healing.

In a world with fireballs, magic and science would be the same thing, and all would be experimented with and could potentially be investigated scientifically.

Now you're trying to change the argument.

I said in my first post in the thread that a "revolution" would be magical not scientific. Of course if you now change the definitions so they are one and the same...

Sorry, I think the terminology might be confusing here. As I said, in RPGs, a fireball is "magic" and gravity is "science". That's because gravity exists in the real world and fireballs don't. But there's also real-world implications about what the process is for "magic" and what is "science". In the game-world, a group could start organized study of fireballs, making hypotheses, doing experiments about what makes the biggest fireball, and publishing the results. That would be applying the Scientific Method to it.

So there's a clash between science meaning "stuff that exists in the real world" and science meaning "a specific organized method of studying phenomena".

Quote from: jhkim on December 07, 2023, 03:30:02 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 07, 2023, 08:49:06 AM
And the process used to achieve each was some variation of trial and error to understand what was and was not possible. Science is just the formalization of that process of trial and error and something akin to it would certainly exist anywhere that a process was repeatable enough to useful.

Something "akin to" science would exist - but the specific question was about the Scientific Revolution, which was much more specific than just trial and error. It is a formal process of hypothesis, experimentation, peer review, and publication in a standardized format.

I mentioned that in my game world, there are benevolent gods and spirits that know a lot more than mortals, and they are generally dominant. So I don't think that a Scientific Revolution would happen culturally - because mortals could gain accurate knowledge about how things work without science. In a world with antagonistic gods, they might disrupt a Scientific Revolution if they disliked it. But there's space in fantasy worlds where a Scientific Revolution might happen, depending on what the gods are like and what they do.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 10:24:47 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 06, 2023, 05:54:49 PM
In the real world, magic and theology are opposed to scientific methodology because the real world doesn't have fireballs. One can't experimentally verify real-world magic or theology. However, if fireballs were real, then magicians would absolutely study and experiment and document their work to find out what process produced the most powerful fireball. Clerics would carefully document what exactly their god supports and how to maximize healing.

In a world with fireballs, magic and science would be the same thing, and all would be experimented with and could potentially be investigated scientifically.

Now you're trying to change the argument.

I said in my first post in the thread that a "revolution" would be magical not scientific. Of course if you now change the definitions so they are one and the same...

Sorry, I think the terminology might be confusing here. As I said, in RPGs, a fireball is "magic" and gravity is "science". That's because gravity exists in the real world and fireballs don't. But there's also real-world implications about what the process is for "magic" and what is "science". In the game-world, a group could start organized study of fireballs, making hypotheses, doing experiments about what makes the biggest fireball, and publishing the results. That would be applying the Scientific Method to it.

So there's a clash between science meaning "stuff that exists in the real world" and science meaning "a specific organized method of studying phenomena".

Assuming magic in your world works following some matemathical or logical rules then yes, there would be a magic revolution with magic usurping the place of science to achieve "progress".

As for science being the formalization of a process... Wrong, that's the scientific method, science is what comes out as true so far as we know by using such method and tech is the practical application of science.

So, in a world where magic is real (and can be studied because it follows some rules or laws), there would be a revolution with wizards inventing a floating rug  anyone can use, magic shields that activate by touching a rune, etc.

But what if magic doesn't follow rules? What if the exact way you cast fireball doesn't work for others?

Thing is a "technological" revolution would be possible in the first case, by understanding the rules/laws of magic. Not in the other case.

But it wouldn't be a scientific revolution.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 06:08:39 PM
Assuming magic in your world works following some matemathical or logical rules then yes, there would be a magic revolution with magic usurping the place of science to achieve "progress".

As for science being the formalization of a process... Wrong, that's the scientific method, science is what comes out as true so far as we know by using such method and tech is the practical application of science.

Bolding mine above. You define science as what comes out as true, but in the game-world, fireballs are objectively true. A wizard can reliably produce a fireball, whose properties can be measured. If fireballs are true, then by this definition, they are science.

Regardless of terminology, I don't see why a Magic Revolution would usurp a Scientific Revolution. Different disciplines often support each other. In our world, the revolution in astronomy didn't usurp or disrupt discoveries in biology or chemistry. Certain spells could make it easier to carry out many scientific experiments, and conversely, there could be many uses for science in understanding spells. For example, in our world, testing whether lightning was electricity was dangerous because there was no reliable source of lightning. But magic could allow repeatable tests of what high-voltage electricity can do. It might allow the development of lightning rods and a greater understanding of electricity and conductivity.

Quote from: jhkim on December 07, 2023, 08:19:44 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 06:08:39 PM
Assuming magic in your world works following some matemathical or logical rules then yes, there would be a magic revolution with magic usurping the place of science to achieve "progress".

As for science being the formalization of a process... Wrong, that's the scientific method, science is what comes out as true so far as we know by using such method and tech is the practical application of science.

Bolding mine above. You define science as what comes out as true, but in the game-world, fireballs are objectively true. A wizard can reliably produce a fireball, whose properties can be measured. If fireballs are true, then by this definition, they are science.

Regardless of terminology, I don't see why a Magic Revolution would usurp a Scientific Revolution. Different disciplines often support each other. In our world, the revolution in astronomy didn't usurp or disrupt discoveries in biology or chemistry. Certain spells could make it easier to carry out many scientific experiments, and conversely, there could be many uses for science in understanding spells. For example, in our world, testing whether lightning was electricity was dangerous because there was no reliable source of lightning. But magic could allow repeatable tests of what high-voltage electricity can do. It might allow the development of lightning rods and a greater understanding of electricity and conductivity.

Stop trying to redefine terms.

Science is the output of the scientific method it's what comes out as true AS FAR AS WE KNOW. Science, by definition needs to be falsifiable, if it can't be falsified in any way then it's not science.

So, for your redefiniton of terms to even work fireballs need to be the output of an hypothesis, followed by experimentation and the final theory needs to have conditions under which it can be falsified.

For example if you were to EVER find a crocoduck you falsify evolution.

You do understand that astronomy, biology & chemistry are different scientific disciplines don't you?

If, barring a fusion reactor, you could turn lead into gold you'd be violating several laws.

Same goes for wall of iron, stone or ice.

How does a wizard cast lightning without getting zapped by it?

More scientific laws being violated.

How do you become a member of the opposite sex? No higher animal can.

How do you become a member of a different species?

Do you understand that magic violates ALL scientific laws?

So either they don't exist or they allow for magic in the game world, BUT, assuming the latter, fly, tenser's floating disk...

So gravity can be cancelled at will...

Now please explain how the fuck does a scientific revolution (that's the question, not a technological one) take place? Are you just going to handwave the laws needed for it? I mean you can, it's your world, but IMHO it makes zero sense.

Now, in my world maybe people could reach other worlds, but it would be achieved by different means than IRL.

Yes, I know the lazy and tired "Any sufficiently... blah, blah, blah", feelfree to use it all you want IMHO it just dilutes the wonder of a mythical world where magic is real.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 08:43:07 PM
Science is the output of the scientific method it's what comes out as true AS FAR AS WE KNOW. Science, by definition needs to be falsifiable, if it can't be falsified in any way then it's not science.

So, for your redefiniton of terms to even work fireballs need to be the output of an hypothesis, followed by experimentation and the final theory needs to have conditions under which it can be falsified.

For example if you were to EVER find a crocoduck you falsify evolution.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 08:43:07 PM
Do you understand that magic violates ALL scientific laws?

Magic like fireballs violate the scientific laws of the real world, but that's not the same as the scientific laws of a fantasy world. Different universes work differently, so there must be different scientific laws. These are two overlapping but not identical sets:

(1) Laws of Science - real world (or LoS-RW)

(2) Laws of Science - fantasy world (or LoS-FW)

In the real world, if scientists are faced with data that don't match the predictions, then the laws are wrong and have to be revised to account for the new data. If in the real world, someone showed up who could throw fireballs, then scientists wouldn't just ignore him and say "Oh, science doesn't cover this." They'd study and see how he did it. i.e. The laws of science would be revised to account for the observed phenomena of fireball-throwing.

Scientists don't ignore parts of the world that don't fit their theories. They revise their theories to match the events of the world.

In a fantasy world, scientists would make hypotheses and try to discover LoS-FW. What they would come up with would be different than LoS-RW because different things are true in the different worlds. Different data leads to different conclusions.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 08:43:07 PM
Now please explain how the fuck does a scientific revolution (that's the question, not a technological one) take place? Are you just going to handwave the laws needed for it? I mean you can, it's your world, but IMHO it makes zero sense.

Now, in my world maybe people could reach other worlds, but it would be achieved by different means than IRL.

Yes, I know the lazy and tired "Any sufficiently... blah, blah, blah", feelfree to use it all you want IMHO it just dilutes the wonder of a mythical world where magic is real.

I don't think that fireballs produce any great mythic wonder. Indeed, I think that most fantasy RPGs are lacking in any sense of wonder to their magic. It's no more wondrous than flamethrowers and grenades. If one wants more wondrous and mythic magic, I have an old essay on that:

https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

I should make some sort of update on that.

Quote from: jhkim on December 08, 2023, 01:41:07 AM
I don't think that fireballs produce any great mythic wonder. Indeed, I think that most fantasy RPGs are lacking in any sense of wonder to their magic. It's no more wondrous than flamethrowers and grenades. If one wants more wondrous and mythic magic, I have an old essay on that:

https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

I should make some sort of update on that.

Good article. It sums up nicely why D&D's base mechanics and assumptions lead to a setting where magic is effectively a field of science (and gods are just extra-dimensional master wielders of magic energy who can grant some of it to people devoted to it, but also that sufficiently powerful PCs can just hop dimensions and kill).

Frankly, my setting being largely "gonzo D&D" and it's logical conclusions are why I stopped calling it a fantasy setting and switched to "science fantasy" to describe it.

Mages are cargo-culting a Precursor nano-machine network. They use Arcane to describe it because the normal definition for arcane is "poorly understood." Some are purely theoretical/research scientists (trying to understand the Arcane Web and its functions through trial and error) while most PCs are going the more "applied sciences" route.

QuoteAs a Christian, you're both wrong, and you're both falling for the same trap: Inserting yourself with all of your IRL preconceptions into the Game World.

Newton (or anybody else for that matter) NEVER saw a cleric heal an amputated leg, never saw ANY of the vaunted Alchemists cast fireball, he was operating on FAITH.

On the contrary. You put modern preconceptions dividing magic and science and religion into separate neat exclusive boxes.
But people pre-Englightement were not like this, and most people then would say you about things they've seen or really believed happen that they considered magical in some way.

Sure no one was throwing fireballs, or other vulgar magicks to use Mage jargon, but well for most history human believes about magic didn't really included fireballs :P

Point is - strong conviction about supernatural and spiritual influencing world constantly never stopped people of intellectual inclination from trying to discern how things works.
Even if you have cleric healing amputated leg - that's still something that happened in some way. There are rules to it. Rules can be checked, and analysed, and written down. Both in magic, in religion and in science.

QuoteBut in a world where gods walk the earth or at the very least intervene daily in the affairs of mortals, where magic is very much real, where supernatural beings like Dragons, Immortal Elves, long lived Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc. not only exist but the common man has to deal with them, where in your lifetime a battle between the forces of good and evil took place close enough so you could hear or see it, where your uncle and his family the next town over got murdered by werewolves.

In such a world faith isn't neccesary and wouldn't exist, people would ACTUALLY KNOW the gods are real.

And if you KNOW empirically Gods are real, that's even more reason to research their ways, and try to find logic and rule to their behavior.
Dwarves exists? Perfect. Let's make a section of one's body to see how he differs from goblin in terms of internal organs. Like why not?

As long as there are some stable rules to your reality - they can be researched.
Now can scientific revolution happen in strict sense - I'd say like any other revolution it depends on material conditions.
If your artificers and alchemists are so good there is no economical push for industries - then sure chances of industrial revolution are low. But if your magical world has limited number of such esoteric researchers and their power is limited - then you still need non-magical engineers, stonemasons, mathematicians, architects and so on.
For scientific revolution even with magic what you need is stable network of researchers academias - like European universities evolved into.

QuoteFrom this it follows that if the common explanation for something people don't understand (as it usually is) is because the gods will it. Who would doubt it? Why? There's no reason to do so.

Yeah you know it was common explanation in our world as well. For centuries.
Never stopped researchers from research, because unless your world is eldritch nightmare of chaotically changing rules every day, that means rules exist, they can be predicted, and you want to predict them, because unless it's rare setting when gods are constantly speaking in everyones heads what to do - your fantasy folk still need to predict how reality operates to you know... LIVE.
And that's begininng of science - noticing and applying patterns in observable world.

QuoteNewton didn't discover anything in a vacuum, he was building on stuff others did before him. When he couldn't explain one aspect of the planets moving what did he do? "God's Will" that was his answer.

Yeah and you see Newton used God as Gap-filler indeed, but only after reaching limits of own research, and not seeing other options. He did not resigned from researching of Natural Order just because God willed it.

QuoteI said in my first post in the thread that a "revolution" would be magical not scientific. Of course if you now change the definitions so they are one and the same...

Yes, and no. Those are not contradictionary things really.
Magic is personal art of using certain powers in universe, to personally achieve results beyond your usual limitations. Science is organised empirical research of phenomena.
Magical revolution would be more akin to industrial revolution - one that would popularise use of magic as art to masses, or allow magicians to replace whole industries.
Science revolution is basically raise of academia - any real phenomenon magical or not would fall under such scrutiny.

You can have world with magic with scientific and not magical revolution (because for instance magic is still quite rare and cannot dominate world markets), you can have on with magical but not scientific - magical industries, but no organised academical traditions to serve as basis for organised research, you can have neither and both.

QuoteBasically, what is Magic and what is Technology is entirely subjective to the observer. A steel sword is magic to a caveman, an airplane is magic to a medieval, teleportation would be magic to us. To the person who built the sword, the airplane or the teleporter it's just technology.

That I would not agree completely. I can easily envision various ways of magick that would not exactly fit as technology. More like art.
In a way martial art is not technology though it has techniques - because results are strictly dependent of living sentient user - I can give you pencil and it gonna work the same way, I cannot pass karate chops the same way. Like wand that can be used by anyone would be technology I guess, achieved by magical craft. Fireball - not necessarily.

QuoteWrong, that's the scientific method, science is what comes out as true so far as we know by using such method and tech is the practical application of science.

According to Oxford dictionary science is "knowledge about the structure and behaviour of the natural and physical world, based on facts that you can prove, for example by experiments".
As such in-verse of any fantasy or sci-fi world it can be applied as in-world science towards phenomena we consider supernatural, magical or just well fake. If magic in your setting can undergo empirical scrutiny - therefore it can be object of scientific research. Simple as that.

QuoteBut what if magic doesn't follow rules? What if the exact way you cast fireball doesn't work for others?

Thing is a "technological" revolution would be possible in the first case, by understanding the rules/laws of magic. Not in the other case.

But it wouldn't be a scientific revolution.

If magic is predictable you can totally put it into scientific revolution area. It may or not compete with industrial revolution - but industrial =/= scientific.
Scientific revolution was limited to evolution of academia - sure it was symbiotic with industry but they are not the same.

Industrial Revolution(s) were changes in way of producing things that changes economic relations and lifestyle of people in wide regard.
Magical Revolution could replace it - or not, they could co-exist - that's steampunk common motive - Magicians and Engineers working together to umph mutual work.
Golem gonna be way more effective if done from proper tight gear system rather than clay mould let's say ;)

On the other hand Scientific Revolution happened on academia, and it's separate problem altogether. Science replaced let's say very simplisticly Scholastic methods, rationalism kinda dumping on empiricism.

QuoteScience is the output of the scientific method it's what comes out as true AS FAR AS WE KNOW. Science, by definition needs to be falsifiable, if it can't be falsified in any way then it's not science.

Magick can be falsifiable in fantasy settings so?

QuoteFor example if you were to EVER find a crocoduck you falsify evolution.

No you won't because Theory of Evolution is paradigm and not scientific theory. It's general model.
You gonna falsify specific theories about origin and relation of crocodiles, and ducks, and timeline of their emergence - not evolution as whole.

QuoteIf, barring a fusion reactor, you could turn lead into gold you'd be violating several laws.

Same goes for wall of iron, stone or ice.

How does a wizard cast lightning without getting zapped by it?

More scientific laws being violated.

Yes, but in fantasy world scientific laws CAN BE DIFFERENT.

QuoteNow please explain how the fuck does a scientific revolution (that's the question, not a technological one) take place? Are you just going to handwave the laws needed for it? I mean you can, it's your world, but IMHO it makes zero sense.

I don't see a problem.
Laws still exist. Magic still works withing laws, it can give extra energy for instance to transform things without fusion - but still magician needs to arcanelly conjure this energy according to specific laws and rules. Unless it's wanton dream whatever magic then indeed any empiricism will fall.

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 13, 2024, 02:48:11 PM

QuoteBasically, what is Magic and what is Technology is entirely subjective to the observer. A steel sword is magic to a caveman, an airplane is magic to a medieval, teleportation would be magic to us. To the person who built the sword, the airplane or the teleporter it's just technology.

That I would not agree completely. I can easily envision various ways of magick that would not exactly fit as technology. More like art.

In a way martial art is not technology though it has techniques - because results are strictly dependent of living sentient user - I can give you pencil and it gonna work the same way, I cannot pass karate chops the same way. Like wand that can be used by anyone would be technology I guess, achieved by magical craft. Fireball - not necessarily.

I mostly agree on the other stuff, but for clarity, I am speaking above of the perception gap between, say a 5 year old kid watching a magic show, and the magician performing the tricks.

To the kid it's pure magic when the magician pulls a coin from his ear.

To the magician it's using the arts of misdirection and sleight of hand (which are well understood and practiced by him and certainly not "supernatural").

It is also known to be misdirection and sleight of hand by many adults, ergo not "supernatural", even if they are incapable of performing the tasks themselves (just as a person can understand the principles of the karate kick without being able to perform it... the martial arts are not "magic" even if they can't perform them).

Thus, whether the trick is magic or mundane depends entirely on the perspective of the observer.

What would be seen as supernatural to the average peasant might be understood as a science by a wizard (ex. biomechanics and physics are the foundation of the martial arts... the principles of manipulating the Weave so it releases a magic spell could be the foundation of wizardry) even if it's applications are largely "art" (the training to use martial arts or properly performing the movements and sounds and what materials are needed to manipulate the Weave in a specific way).

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 13, 2024, 02:48:11 PM

QuoteAs a Christian, you're both wrong, and you're both falling for the same trap: Inserting yourself with all of your IRL preconceptions into the Game World.

Newton (or anybody else for that matter) NEVER saw a cleric heal an amputated leg, never saw ANY of the vaunted Alchemists cast fireball, he was operating on FAITH.

On the contrary. You put modern preconceptions dividing magic and science and religion into separate neat exclusive boxes.
But people pre-Englightement were not like this, and most people then would say you about things they've seen or really believed happen that they considered magical in some way.

Sure no one was throwing fireballs, or other vulgar magicks to use Mage jargon, but well for most history human believes about magic didn't really included fireballs :P

Point is - strong conviction about supernatural and spiritual influencing world constantly never stopped people of intellectual inclination from trying to discern how things works.
Even if you have cleric healing amputated leg - that's still something that happened in some way. There are rules to it. Rules can be checked, and analysed, and written down. Both in magic, in religion and in science.

QuoteBut in a world where gods walk the earth or at the very least intervene daily in the affairs of mortals, where magic is very much real, where supernatural beings like Dragons, Immortal Elves, long lived Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc. not only exist but the common man has to deal with them, where in your lifetime a battle between the forces of good and evil took place close enough so you could hear or see it, where your uncle and his family the next town over got murdered by werewolves.

In such a world faith isn't neccesary and wouldn't exist, people would ACTUALLY KNOW the gods are real.

And if you KNOW empirically Gods are real, that's even more reason to research their ways, and try to find logic and rule to their behavior.
Dwarves exists? Perfect. Let's make a section of one's body to see how he differs from goblin in terms of internal organs. Like why not?

As long as there are some stable rules to your reality - they can be researched.
Now can scientific revolution happen in strict sense - I'd say like any other revolution it depends on material conditions.
If your artificers and alchemists are so good there is no economical push for industries - then sure chances of industrial revolution are low. But if your magical world has limited number of such esoteric researchers and their power is limited - then you still need non-magical engineers, stonemasons, mathematicians, architects and so on.
For scientific revolution even with magic what you need is stable network of researchers academias - like European universities evolved into.

QuoteFrom this it follows that if the common explanation for something people don't understand (as it usually is) is because the gods will it. Who would doubt it? Why? There's no reason to do so.

Yeah you know it was common explanation in our world as well. For centuries.
Never stopped researchers from research, because unless your world is eldritch nightmare of chaotically changing rules every day, that means rules exist, they can be predicted, and you want to predict them, because unless it's rare setting when gods are constantly speaking in everyones heads what to do - your fantasy folk still need to predict how reality operates to you know... LIVE.
And that's begininng of science - noticing and applying patterns in observable world.

QuoteNewton didn't discover anything in a vacuum, he was building on stuff others did before him. When he couldn't explain one aspect of the planets moving what did he do? "God's Will" that was his answer.

Yeah and you see Newton used God as Gap-filler indeed, but only after reaching limits of own research, and not seeing other options. He did not resigned from researching of Natural Order just because God willed it.

QuoteI said in my first post in the thread that a "revolution" would be magical not scientific. Of course if you now change the definitions so they are one and the same...

Yes, and no. Those are not contradictionary things really.
Magic is personal art of using certain powers in universe, to personally achieve results beyond your usual limitations. Science is organised empirical research of phenomena.
Magical revolution would be more akin to industrial revolution - one that would popularise use of magic as art to masses, or allow magicians to replace whole industries.
Science revolution is basically raise of academia - any real phenomenon magical or not would fall under such scrutiny.

You can have world with magic with scientific and not magical revolution (because for instance magic is still quite rare and cannot dominate world markets), you can have on with magical but not scientific - magical industries, but no organised academical traditions to serve as basis for organised research, you can have neither and both.

QuoteBasically, what is Magic and what is Technology is entirely subjective to the observer. A steel sword is magic to a caveman, an airplane is magic to a medieval, teleportation would be magic to us. To the person who built the sword, the airplane or the teleporter it's just technology.

That I would not agree completely. I can easily envision various ways of magick that would not exactly fit as technology. More like art.
In a way martial art is not technology though it has techniques - because results are strictly dependent of living sentient user - I can give you pencil and it gonna work the same way, I cannot pass karate chops the same way. Like wand that can be used by anyone would be technology I guess, achieved by magical craft. Fireball - not necessarily.

QuoteWrong, that's the scientific method, science is what comes out as true so far as we know by using such method and tech is the practical application of science.

According to Oxford dictionary science is "knowledge about the structure and behaviour of the natural and physical world, based on facts that you can prove, for example by experiments".
As such in-verse of any fantasy or sci-fi world it can be applied as in-world science towards phenomena we consider supernatural, magical or just well fake. If magic in your setting can undergo empirical scrutiny - therefore it can be object of scientific research. Simple as that.

QuoteBut what if magic doesn't follow rules? What if the exact way you cast fireball doesn't work for others?

Thing is a "technological" revolution would be possible in the first case, by understanding the rules/laws of magic. Not in the other case.

But it wouldn't be a scientific revolution.

If magic is predictable you can totally put it into scientific revolution area. It may or not compete with industrial revolution - but industrial =/= scientific.
Scientific revolution was limited to evolution of academia - sure it was symbiotic with industry but they are not the same.

Industrial Revolution(s) were changes in way of producing things that changes economic relations and lifestyle of people in wide regard.
Magical Revolution could replace it - or not, they could co-exist - that's steampunk common motive - Magicians and Engineers working together to umph mutual work.
Golem gonna be way more effective if done from proper tight gear system rather than clay mould let's say ;)

On the other hand Scientific Revolution happened on academia, and it's separate problem altogether. Science replaced let's say very simplisticly Scholastic methods, rationalism kinda dumping on empiricism.

QuoteScience is the output of the scientific method it's what comes out as true AS FAR AS WE KNOW. Science, by definition needs to be falsifiable, if it can't be falsified in any way then it's not science.

Magick can be falsifiable in fantasy settings so?

QuoteFor example if you were to EVER find a crocoduck you falsify evolution.

No you won't because Theory of Evolution is paradigm and not scientific theory. It's general model.
You gonna falsify specific theories about origin and relation of crocodiles, and ducks, and timeline of their emergence - not evolution as whole.

QuoteIf, barring a fusion reactor, you could turn lead into gold you'd be violating several laws.

Same goes for wall of iron, stone or ice.

How does a wizard cast lightning without getting zapped by it?

More scientific laws being violated.

Yes, but in fantasy world scientific laws CAN BE DIFFERENT.

QuoteNow please explain how the fuck does a scientific revolution (that's the question, not a technological one) take place? Are you just going to handwave the laws needed for it? I mean you can, it's your world, but IMHO it makes zero sense.

I don't see a problem.
Laws still exist. Magic still works withing laws, it can give extra energy for instance to transform things without fusion - but still magician needs to arcanelly conjure this energy according to specific laws and rules. Unless it's wanton dream whatever magic then indeed any empiricism will fall.

You keep equivocating between science and technology.

I've said multiple times (you quoted several) that a magic fuelled technological revolution would be possible.

You don't seem to understand falsifiable, we need to have a propossed path to prove X to be false, if there's none then it's faith not science.

Now, when you can see magic being done, when you can learn to perform magic deeds, when there's no smoke and mirrors involved, what's the path to prove magic isn't real?

People were building mega structures long before they knew math or material resistance. Even going so far as to orienting them to the solsctices before they knew what were those lights or why they alkways moved like that.

Empirical knowledge, not scientific knowledge was used for most of our history.

A crockoduck falsifies evolution, for several evolutionary facts and laws being violated/proven false.

But giving you a lesson about evolution or scientific theories is off topic.