VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 17:54:32 08/08/05 Mon
Author: Rosie
Author Host/IP: 170.97.167.60
Subject: Re: Magic in Buffyverse
In reply to: Rosie 's message, "Re: Magic in Buffyverse" on 15:12:30 08/08/05 Mon

"But I don't see how putting spells into categories and assigning them names is an "excuse." The categories themselves imply intent, you don't use a black magic spell unless you want a black magic effect, just as you don't use poison unless you want to poison something - that's not making a judgement about the morality of chemistry."

But that is the point I've been trying to make. That one shouldn't label magic as "dark" or "good"; and that it's all about the magic practioner's intent.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> If we go back to your quote, it's actually got two parts. -- Eurydice, 20:40:07 08/08/05 Mon [1] (141.154.25.113)

The first part of the quote assumes magic is morally neutral, but the second part says that in the Jossverse magic becomes ambiguous because the intent of the practitioner becomes irrelevent. The second part of the quote assumes that there are greater, or at least uncontrollable, forces out there which can subvert anybody's actions. I was just addressing your question, which only referred to the first part of the quote. And you started your question with "If this is true.."

Well, one answer could be that people don't believe magic is morally neutral. And I think that comes from all those millenia of conditioning I was talking about in my other posts - and except for those who are Wiccan and/or those who practice witchcraft (not always the same thing as I've been told), most people don't understand magic or are interested in it or believe it exists, so they'll go along with what the fairy tales told them. I don't think that says anything about their willingness to face facts or accept responsibility.

If you add the second part of the quote into the equation, the thing becames more complicated because the practitioner can't guarantee success at all, regardless of intent. Whether you're a good guy who ended up doing something bad or a bad guy who ended up doing good, neither result is desirable - in this case, magic isn't neutral, it's capricious, and we should take Spike's advice and stay away from it. :-)


[ Edit | View ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.