Religion and metaphysics

Games Discussion Ars Magica
41

Religion is a cultural phenomenon. If you're brought up a Christian then, all things being equal, that's what you are and that's what you stay. In real life there's nothing divine about it but it can also be applied to the game. If you live within a Christian culture then chances are you'll at least adopt the trappings and mannerisms that go with it. And if you adopt those, then it's fair to suggest that the thought processes and assumptions behind those will get adopted too.

Unless you develop your own path (or choose to adopt the path someone else has already developed) then you're bound up in the cultural norms around you.

42

Yeah, sure, the magi can't tell whether god is not just a powerful demon, or faerie, or magical creature. Or is merely lying about his exact role in creation. Or whether the bible is an error, and in fact irrelevant to god.

However, the Divine does what it claims it should do...Mythic Europe is a world where miracles occur and there is incontrovertible evidence for their occurrence. Divine auras emanate from sites of worship. The ghosts of people who receive Christian burial rites are no longer contactable by Hermetic magic, etc.

Now I realise, that absolutely from a 21st Century philosophical viewpoint this proves nothing. But that is not relevant to the game. It is only if your characters have a high Score in Philosophiae and/or Theology that they are capable of making such arguments. And that doesn't mean they are right.

43

Philosophy is all about asking questions at people...

44

I am not talking about 21 century philosophy. Socrates for exaple asked the "euthaphro question": is the good really good or did god make it good. If the former then something is external to god, which makes him imperfect and not the cause of all, if it is the latter then the word good just means "what god wants" which means god is a "fascist" and we dont need to follow him (this is a oversimplified account). the point is there are all kinds of interesting philosophical problems and topics that real medievals had to deal with. I am not smuggling anything modern in here.

Never said that what they believe is what is correct. My original post was about what it is reasonable for them to believe given q1 q2 and a3.

Now would every magi have a high score in philosophiae. Probably not. Of course, remember the case of the opening story in ArM 4ed. That character is pius and eventually is no longer religious. thats the outcome of being raised by a non-theist parens. Thus, I dont think we can confine non-theists in the OoH to the subset of magi that read philosphy.

45

I agree with all that.

The counter argument would be that magi are brought up within the Order --- that is what apprenticeship is. So if the OoH is not Christian, then it will perpetuate itself as not Christian, for exactly this reason.

However, I think, that the Order is (mostly) Christian ... although almost certainly heretical to a greater or lesser extent. So it should perpetuate itself as being mostly Christian.

46

There is also a parallel between science and magic.

In the medieval period explanation of phenomena was generality rooted in scripture. What is more, far greater importance was placed on allegorical and moral explanations, as opposed to natural explanation. As science developed and gained greater capacity to predict explain and control, god as a hypothesis became less and less used. Thats why, so many christian scholars became deists after the renaissance, the enlighenment and dawn of the scientific age.

Now, consider how hermetic theory (which is rooted in a greek paradigm and not a christian paradigm) is so powerful in predicting explaining and controlling phenomena. As this increases magi require the god hypothesis less and less. The result should be a move towards deism or perhaps pantheism, if not something more bold.

One problem that I see is that people are making claims that "this is what was believed in real medieval europe." That is a good starting point. But its not the final place. We need to consider, given what was historically believe what would magi with arcane powers believe. This will lead us away from settling on the given historica period.

For example,

we can say people in medieval europe did not often use or own currency. Ok, very interesting and important. But that does not mean that magi would not. We are inserting a fictional into history and then extrapolating how things would change.

47

So, the best model would be to look at real medieval philosophers.

Real European medieval philosophers were overwhelmingly Christian (except if they were on the fringes and were Muslim or Jewish). Of course, real medieval philosphers were frequently heretics of one sort or another --- but they were still Christian.

Magi would be the same, I think. Magi have access to more or less the same information as real medieval philosophers...except they also have access to magic, which can prove that the Divine exists (or at least something pretending to be the Divine exists).

I think your q3 is wrong. Most magi would not know that Muslim, Christian and Jewish worship of the Divine is equivalent.

Most magi would not have seen a mosque. Most magi would not have entered a synagogue. Most magi cannot read the Koran (Arabic). Most magi cannot read the Torah (Hebrew).

Even if they did believe that all three Divine religions were equivalent, then why would they conclude that some sort of pantheism or deism is OK from the point of view of the Divine? One of the things that all three Divine religions agree on is that there is one god, whose proof of existence is revelation, faith, and miracle. This discounts both pantheism and deism.

I think that it is much more likely that most magi are Christian with lots of little heresies.

48

Wizards have a greater ability to control reality than mortals. That's true. That's why most wizards would tend towards heresies of the gnostic/hermetic sort: I get secret knowledge and gifts from God. Theurgistic practices will enable me to get closer and closer to the Ultimate.

There's really no reason for the magi to turn to a non monotheistic 'solution' to the religious question and little reason for them to consider themselves non christian when they do.

If you want to make scholarly arguments about whether they are technically theist, deist, or pantheist I suppose you can. But its not particularly relevant to anything. The magus will almost certainly consider himself a Christian regardless of which of the three he is. Those that do reject the idea of being Christian are far more likely to be making a political statement than a religious one, unless they happen to be one of the magi brought up in a pagan faith. Which I think are far fewer than you believe.

49

Ok, I already gave an answer to this in my previous posts.

Notice you speak of "the divine" but thats a theory laden observation. Notice, magi are aware of divine auras, true faith, etc. Not "the divine". one explanation is that there is one or more sources for this phenomena.

Again, I did not say they would know that it is equivalent. I said they would know that there were muslim auras muslim truth faith wielders, etc.

This is not important if they experienced it themselves. So long as they hear or read about it then it would be something interesting and important for them to think about. Would they have heard of it. Anyone traveling tot he levant or to iberria would hear about it. Lets not forget roving recaps enchanting their hosts about distant strange divine auras. finally, there are bonisagi that will want to discuss this to better understand how the divine interacts with magic and to develop their understanding of magic theory. Magi would know of these things even if they never actually encountered them.

Notice what you keep doing, your smuggling a theistic account into here. If deism is true then god doesnt have a view or think a view is correct. he is just the the infinite perfect ground for being. Wheres if pantheism is true everything is a manifestation of god, he is not seperate or over and above reality: there would be no view that is ok or not ok for the divine in pantheism, god would not be the sort of thing that has a view: in that case divine auras and true faith are just unique phenomena in need of explanation. i dont mean to be rude but from your posts it seems to me that you dont understand deism and pantheism.

wow, just because 3 religions agree on those things does not mean pantheism or deism are false.

50

Now you are abandoning your initial premise. Deism and pantheism both fundamentally deny the active principle of the godhead. You can't meaningfully be a deist in the modern sense if you accept that miracles happen at God's will. I suppose you could make an argument that miracles and true faith are just variant forms of magic and The Gift and occur independent of God. But that's rather a stretch in Mythic Europe.

And pantheism holds there isn't even a discrete being known as "God" to take any action.

So if magi /know/ about True Faith and divine auras, I don't see how they can come to the view that God isn't active in the world. If the fact that multiple religions seem to have God's blessing agitates them, I'd expect a shift for Origen's views or the idea of Prisca Theologica to be the more logical outcome.

51

you are so close... my point is that the deist and pantheist will explain miraculous phenomena as not arising from gods will. now the mechanics of the game might say that such a view is false, BUT it is a reasonable view to take.

thats not true, anyone in ME who is familiar wit aristotle or many of the presocratic philosophers will not find it a stretch at all. According to ArM there is plenty of reason to think that stuff is common knoweledge in the OoH.

Exactly and that is not a problem

again you are missing my point. you are assuming that it SEEMS that there is a god and that he gives his blessing... But, that is one explanation, not the only or necessay one.

you are arguing in a circle man. you cant exclude deism/pantheism as explanations simply because gods will is not explained. The virtue question (for the magi) is not how do we explain gods will, no the question is what should we conclude from divine auras, true faith etc?

one solution is theism, another deism, etc. you are just not taking non-theism very seriously, you are assuming theism in your attempt to justify theism: thats not legitimate. A PC does not get to kow the real metphysics of the world the way Players and SG do.

52

No, I think you are underestimating the evidence for direct supernatural intervention by a deity. Yes, you /can/ conclude that miracles, angels, saints, holy wells, divine auras, etc happen without any sort of God doing it. But very few people will. It is NOT the most logical conclusion of the evidence in character especially if you give the PCs the level of information you postulate in Q1,2,3.

Deism arose in the Enlightenment fundamentally as a rejection of supernaturalism without rejecting God. Rejecting supernaturalism in ME is ridiculous, especially by wizards who have all kinds of reasons to know it exists. Deism works in the real world because the King of England doesn't actually get the ability to cure Scrofula by touch just for being annointed king.

53

why is not the most logical conclusion? I think you are not grasping inductive logic. That that every X that have seen has property P does not entail that every future X will have P. Now suppose we have a thoery about how all X's have P, lets call it T1, we can produce any number of alternative theories T2 T3 etc.. Induction will not tell us that any of these are logically necessary, or even likely.

Check out en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quine-Duhem_thesis for a brief discussion of underdetermination of theory choice from obsevation. there have been good solutions to the underdetermination problem, but it at least shows how you are ignoring the assumptions that you are making.

thats just wrong, deism is as old as greek phi. yes it was very developed nad popularized in later period but it would be present in ME.

again you have a weird notion of induction. If my roommate startsexhibiting miraculous powers it does not entail that there is a god and that she is doing her will. even if a hundred people who all share the same theology exhibited such powers it does not LOGICALLY entail their beliefs are true and that they are vessels for a divine beings.

Logically we can come up with all kinds of explanations. Anyway, does deism real work in the real world? Thats off topic, but I would point you to a huge body of literature that tosses all god talk out the window. again off topic.

When I was in india I saw faith hindu faith healers, just like the christian faith healers I saw in the US. Assuming science could not explain the healing, on your reading, is logical to conclude that there is a god and and that all of these healers work via its will? Logically that does not follow.

54

If you are going to posit wizards have all this lore and Intellego capability, you can't suddenly stop and say "oh, they are guessing about causes". Are you saying they can determine their is a Divine realm, can determine that it has various capacities, that individuals of particular religions can utilize powers derived from it, that angels and divine beasts exist, and all the rest implied by your Q1, 2, 3 but then assume they've got to make logical guesses as to what that Saint or angel or True Faithful means when it says "God's will be done"?

You can't have it both ways.

Personally, I think magi have less information than you claim. But I also think that there would be plenty of evidence of the intervention of God in the world. The real world examples don't work, because we don't know the causes of your friend's mysterious powers or the faith healers' abilities. But you are saying magi can say "Oh, he has True Faith, that's why he can drop miracles on us." Obviously, all the people who have and utilize those powers, all the supernatural beasts and spirits that live in those realms, are CLEARLY wrong about how and why, because I've figured it out all by myself....

55

ok

you keep mixing up what pcs know and what players know and so i will lay out very clearly.

what do pcs know

  1. there are all kinds of nasty powerful entites. These beings take on the names which correspond to entities that various religions classify them as demons.
  2. there are all kinds of nice powerful entites. These beings take on the names which correspond to entities that various religions classify them as angels
  3. there are places of religious worship that when magi go there arcane powers are greatly reduced. some people feel really uplifted and magi usually feel weakened.
  4. there are some places where vey bad things happen. when magi go there arcane powers are greatly reduced. most people have a very negative reaction to these places and magi usually feel weakened.
  5. there are some people who believe in a religion very strongly. These people can at times exhibit strange powers and sometimes they are resistant to magical powers.
  6. there are a number of religions. They cannot all be literally true.

NOTICE: I dumped all game mechanic terms like true faith, divine aura, the divine, etc.

Now, what logically follows from all of this? Does a belief in personal theistic god logically follow? No! it is not necessary from these in game facts that a personal theistic god must exist: nor does it follow the christian god exists.

Alternative hypotheses:
H1, there is no theistic god, the beings in 1 and 2 created religious myths about themselves for some unknown ends. places of worship have unique properties due to the beliefs of the people.
H2, There is a theistic god, but it is not one described by an abrahamic faith, he has yet to reveal himself. For now it lets lesser beings (those things people refer to as angels and demons) play in the world.
H3 etc. etc.

notice, we can make all kinds of alternative hypotheses.

you really have not understood any ofthe distinctions I have been making.
true faith: what I was getting at is that magi are aware that there are people who exhibit the phenomena that we the players call true faith. the magi does not know that this is powered by "the divine"
divine auras: what I was getting at is that magi are aware of places with certain properties. They dont know that its source is really "the divine" or god.

such things are interpretations and hyptheses.

suppose that 1-5 were true in this world, and suppose that you and I have hermetic powers? Are you saying that such things would be proof of a god and proof of chrisitianity? That would be an unnecessary conclusion.

We have to dump all metagame terminology and all the metaphysical facts that players have but pcs dont have. When we do that there is not one conclusion or the conclusion that must be reached.

Suppose a magi finds an object say a robe (in game it is a holy object aligned with the divine realm). The magi does an intellego spell. He learns that it is asociated with that realm he finds in places of chrisian/jewish and muslim worship.

That does not tell him that there is a god, that that god is chrisitan or any such thing. It is a big jump to go from those facts and claim that it is now established that god exists. Of course, someone might do that, but then that what not be epistemically justified.

56

I'm sorry, but I think you are simply defining things in a fashion that I can't accept so there is no real basis for continuing the discussion.

57

Ah, Mr Kuhn! Hello my old foe! I warn you if you try suggesting a Kuhnian paradigm shift at any point, people will likely lynch you. Hot button issue from 3rd edition! 8)

A personal god makes that easy though: he does it because he -wants- to. That is, a peresonal God gets to make aesthetic choices. He is not required to be consistent.

He likes it? 8)

From a historical perspective theists and general and christian theologians in particular tend to find that answer very unpalatable and have worked very hard to show that good is purely rational and perfect.
[/quote]
I know, but my point is that Jewish philosophers are just as right in ME, and their God is perfectly capable of pulling this sort of thing. He is the sort of God who can think that telling his bestest guy to murder his son, and then saying he was only joking, is not a form of cruelty. They have a God who when he needs to appear to Moses chooses a burning bush because -he likes the shape of a bush, in preference to any other possible shape-. Why is the bush shape more good than a humorous camel in a fez? We don't know, but God does!

You can do this right up to the point where a saint arrives and tells you to stop pulling this sort of crap and you see a Muslim angel and a Christian angel fight over Jersalem, sure. My point is thet you are observing the fingerprints of God, and making a model that suits the evidence. The difference in ME to RE, IMO, is that while you are doing this, God is perfectly willing to send an angel to tell you that He'd like you to get with the program now. That is, the thing you are observing is an active and commincative agent, when it wishes to be. This wrecks a sort of vauge pantheism.

Bwahahah. You grow out of it. When you join the mystery cult of the happily married, your view changes.

No, because only rich guys got multiple wives. Poor guys may not even get one. The same system worked in ancient Judea. You limit procreation to the rich, and this makes the poor more willing to join the army.

58

Why might a magus be Christian? Because he can tell that the priest has no magical powers to speak of; InVi shows nothing. He knows that before the Mass, the host is bread. InHe is very clear on the matter. He can sit in the church with a Sun duration InHe spell up, watching that bread.

At the moment of consecration, the spell stops telling him anything about the Host.

This happens every single time he tries it. Sneaking a bit of the bread off before consecration to get a massively high Penetration total is no help.

Now, the priest says that the Host is God after consecration. That's certainly consistent with what the magus can detect, reliably, at least once per week.

Sure, there are other explanations available, but an ordained priest, any ordained priest, but only an ordained priest, saying those words can always turn bread into... something that is immune to magic. (ArM5 page 203)

As far as I recall from Lucretius (it's a long time since I read De Rerum Natura), one of the arguments against gods in classical atheism is that you just don't see the miracles you'd expect if they were there and involved.

In ME, however, you do see those miracles.

Atheism is a much, much less attractive position in ME than it is in the real world; it has a lot of evidence to explain away. Deism has problems with exactly the same evidence, as it seems to indicate that there is a tinkering God. Historically, hardly anyone has been atheist; theism is far more common. Thus, in ME I suspect that the majority of magi will be approximately Christian. I mean, they have the evidence on their side.

It is certainly true that they can find apparent logical contradictions within the evidence, but that probably won't lead them to doubt the overall picture. After all, scientists live with the fact that general relativity and quantum mechanics are logically incompatible, and don't generally accept the new theories that can make them compatible, due to lack of evidence. I can see magi taking the same attitude: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all appear to be true, but they aren't consistent. Therefore, we don't understand something. However, rejecting the evidence that the three religions are all true is not a sensible response.

59

Timothy and David,

I just want to say a few things here. First, I am not one of these people that thinks that writers are here to make the die hard fan happy, nor do I think a company should be democratic. Look, Atlas is a company and ArM is product. The whole thing is about making making money.

Now, to be honest a lot of my philosophical issues about ArM treatment of god probably couldnt be added to the game: that is a lot of philosohy for one aspect of the game that most people dont have an issue with. I have only brought this up because it interests me. I just wanted to lay those cards down.

Now regarding your treatment of God backing 3 religions and not having each literaly true but at the same time gaining some favor from god. Both of you have given justifications for it. your justifications are good to in so far as they make the game playable without privelaging one religion over any other. (This is why I think people are wrong in saying that ArM is a christian game.)

However, my concerns are rooted in tradition conceptions of the divine by philosohers and theologians. I am not nitpicking here. Theologians and philosophers really have and do get their panties in a bunch over making sure god is perfect. While some theologians/philosophers wave away apparent contradictions by invoking gods mystery or mans flawed intellect, on the whole this is seen as a poor and flawed response. And theologians and philosophers do try to show that we can explain god his perfection and his actions via human reason.

a few example problems. there has been debate over whether or not creation could have been an event that occured in time. If it did, then why did god create reality at time t1 ad not time t2? The worry is that any answer would make the act arbitary. Others have argued that god could not intervene in the world and have miracles because that would imply that his initial creation was less than perfect.

Now, I dont think it is fruitful to debate these things here. This is an ArM forum. I only bring them up to show that I dont think your treatment of god and the three faiths answers concerns about gods rationality and perfection. But again, this is a game, so I am not expecting things to be changed.

60

Regarding the issue about what a magi ought to believe. I think it is a bit amusing because I orignally thought my big claim "that most magi would be deists and pantheists" would be controversial. But I am suprised because most people are arguing that most magi would reasonably be christians, and that deism would be unreasonable (or perhaps, some would say magi would think it improbable, rather than unreasonable). Which means that I the small claim that deism could be reasonable is controversial here. I didnt expect that.

The phenomena in the game that we players call "the divine" and all its manifestations does not logically entail chrisitanity or a personal god. Magi just could be deists that have a different explanation for the phenomena we know with our meta-game knowledge as "the divine".

Now, if people dont buy into that then they have a very different notion of induction and reasoning than what seems to be is the norm: so be it. Regardless, if someone thinks that there is only one best explanation for a given phenomena, or that we can easily decide between competing theories (be they religious, scientific or metaphysical) then there is not much room for debate.

Of course, I am not arguing for relativism or skepticism. What I am arguing for is that for any given phenomena there are always at least a few if not many reasonable hypothesis to explain them. Trying to figure which is right is just not as easy as I think a lot of people here are characterising it as.

Again, this is a game and people can proceed as they like. Maybe people like the idea of metaphysical certainty. On my view that diminishes something in the game.