nagasiva:
> > isn't academia as a whole basically in agreement 
> > with the notion that science has the method by 
> > which reality is disclosed to us?
 
Margaret Gouin:
> This 'notion' is a metaphysical position. 
> Not a proven fact. 

mostly i was asking a *sociological* question, however, and am
not sure that there exists a universal standard for proof. that
is, my question was about the general consensus amongst those
who have standing (especially amongst those who support any 
kind of study of *magic*) in academia.

> To insist that you will not believe something unless 
> provided with irrefutable scientific evidence....

I'm not aware that anyone is doing that, and so i 
generally agree with your conclusions about it.

> ...this is a metaphysical position.

I see your point and find it to be very interesting. what i
understand is being asked in general is not metaphysical 
but instead pragmatic: what data and theory based on this
data generally allows those who study any specific phenomena 
to make accurate and useful predictions so as to be able 
to reliably effect changes based on it, from utility.

metaphysical positions strike me as ultimately unresolvable,
and this is what you are very helpfully pointing out. that
said, there are some physical conclusions reached from these
metaphysical positions that we may winnow based on the 
principle of what is called 'The Razor of Occam', and some
of these eliminate more imaginative and less substantiated
metaphysical speculation, it seems to me.
 
> ...to insist that because one belongs to the community 
> of believers in science one's belief is somehow superior 
> or better than the beliefs of others,

'superior or better': yes, i think this is the general
supposition, and this supposition is based on its 
reliance on testing hypotheses, critical reflection on 
the data resulting from this testing, and peer review 
of this data and resultant critical reflection. 

however, i don't think that it can be left floating 
in the air in a generalization of that magnitude 
('superior or better') without a referent to help 
us understand its relation to interest. that is, i
think it may usually be described by rationalists 
as 'superior or better for predictive activities',
and that this is one of the most important criteria
for evaluation of these kinds of theories (along 
with the aforementioned Occamn's simplification).

> requires--according to the logic of one's own 
> position--irrefutable scientific evidence.

I am not sure that anyone believes in this kind of
evidence. I have never heard it argued as being 
real by reliable scientists or academics. they're 
always amenable to revision of their theories 
where the data demonstrates its necessity. :)

> Thanks for the debate.

isn't it grand? I think this is especially 
important where it intersects the realm of magic
and what may be supported about magic's utility
or effectiveness. metaphysics only really goes 
so far to serve us in any helpful capacity. 
it does theoretical service as it extends to 
ostensibly explain the appearance as we may 
encounter and thereafter test it.

anthropology and physics therefore go hand in
hand for the academic study of magic insofar as
the behaviours of humans (anthropology) may or 
may not produce the type of results expected 
(physics), and both of these disciplines may at
times generate hypotheses outside of their 
fields to match conceptions of those who use 
magic or the phenomena encountered as a 
result of it.

after that, it becomes a matter of faith that
we cannot predictably subject to testing, and 
is therefore completely unnecessary to the 
scientist except as a means of satisfying 
the mind in what are called 'mysteries'.

I hope to splay amongst the various poles of
the debate/discussion and avoid any critical
or crude evaluations, respectfully addressing
all of those who particilpate in the discussion. (:

nagasiva yronwode ([log in to unmask]), Director 
  YIPPIE*! -- http://www.yronwode.org/
----------------------------------------------------- 
  *Yronwode Institution for the Preservation
   and Popularization of Indigenous Ethnomagicology
-----------------------------------------------------