And then read the rest of the book, and go back and read it again.
Admittedly, Levi-Strauss does not think magic is a science, but in the
loose sense we've been using "science" here lately he probably would.
Chris Lehrich
Stephen Wemeyer wrote:
> Dear Cat,
>
> Claude Lévi-Strauss _/ Pensée Sauvage_ /(/The Savage Mind/) Read his
> discussion of “The Science of the Concrete.”
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Steve Wehmeyer
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Society for The Academic Study of Magic
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Caelum
> Rainieri
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2006 5:21 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Some Inherent Problems in
> Researching Magical Practice
>
> Personally, I'd like to hear an informed argument supporting magic as
> a science, not because I believe it is one, but because I can't
> imagine how it could be done.
>
> Caelum
>
>
> */Cat Vincent <[log in to unmask]>/* wrote:
>
>> Defining magic as an "art" (in opposition to "science") is already
>> narrowing your scope. I wouldn't necessarily do that. It is an
>> assumption.
>>
> A fair point - though of course it's not much of a science either -
> the whole problem of repeatability under laboratory conditions is a
> major one.
>
> One could say that, like the Taoist view of the nature of God, any
> attempt to define magic is by definition *wrong*... but this lacks
> utility!
>
> Cat
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------
> occultimatum.blogspot.com
> www.squidoo.com/oam
> www.nahualli.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Mail
> Use Photomail
> <http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=38867/*http:/photomail.mail.yahoo.com>
> to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
--
Christopher I. Lehrich
Boston University
|