Nemesis, Collaboration, and Sarissa...

[Quantus]

I disagree.  Is it the hammer and saw that build a house, or the Carpenter. 

Magic can reshape reality, just like a hammer and a saw can reshape a piece of wood.  But won't without the skill and will of a carpenter.

Huh?  All Im saying is that the statement of "Magic can reshape reality so Rules or Limits never actually apply to Harry" is a logical fallacy.  It's akin to the famous statement "Give me a big enough Level and I'll move the world" because No, you wont, even if you managed to find a lever (and a fulcrum) of size and material that would make it physically possible.  Or to saying that Because Physics are a Thing, Our Hero can catch Bullets and crush Diamonds with their bare hands.  No.  The Quantitative side still matters. 

[Rasins]

Oh ... sorry.  I didn't mean to imply that the rules don't apply to Harry, just that Magic users CAN reshape reality.

[Mira]

Oh ... sorry.  I didn't mean to imply that the rules don't apply to Harry, just that Magic users CAN reshape reality.

Can they really?  Or is it mostly illusion that they are shaping?  This may be a leap from my sleep deprived mind, but I think this is why mind magic is mostly forbidden under the Laws of Magic..  The mind is altered so the the perception of the world is altered, but that isn't reality.

[Quantus]

Can they really?  Or is it mostly illusion that they are shaping?  This may be a leap from my sleep deprived mind, but I think this is why mind magic is mostly forbidden under the Laws of Magic..  The mind is altered so the the perception of the world is altered, but that isn't reality.

No, it's actual physical reality that gets warped, independent of any given perception.  To your point though, in a pure NN demesne like what that ghost in GP or powerful NN creatures seem to have, I expect the line to get far more blurry, though.

[LordDresden2]

No, it's actual physical reality that gets warped, independent of any given perception.  To your point though, in a pure NN demesne like what that ghost in GP or powerful NN creatures seem to have, I expect the line to get far more blurry, though.

Actually, I've wondered if 'rewrite reality' is as broad as we've sometimes assumed.  That is, I'm not sure that magic can be used to rewrite reality into anything the mage wants, I suspect there may be rules and limits as to what changes can be made, even by the major players.

[Rasins]

When you consider that Magic (at least according to Harry) are the very powers of creation, it makes sense that those powers can be used to modify things, or to put it another way, to reshape reality.

[LordDresden2]

When you consider that Magic (at least according to Harry) are the very powers of creation, it makes sense that those powers can be used to modify things, or to put it another way, to reshape reality.

The impression I get from the DF is that 'magic' is actually more than one thing, albeit the various things are related.  More than one power source, more than one set of rules, more than one set of limits.  There may be common underlying foundations, but I think Harry's understanding of magic, esp. in the early books, was oversimplified.

[Rasins]

The impression I get from the DF is that 'magic' is actually more than one thing, albeit the various things are related.  More than one power source, more than one set of rules, more than one set of limits.  There may be common underlying foundations, but I think Harry's understanding of magic, esp. in the early books, was oversimplified.

I agree, it was (and probably still is) oversimplified.

However, it still stands to reason that it can reshape reality.  I kind of think that's why it's there in the first place.

[Quantus]

The impression I get from the DF is that 'magic' is actually more than one thing, albeit the various things are related.  More than one power source, more than one set of rules, more than one set of limits.  There may be common underlying foundations, but I think Harry's understanding of magic, esp. in the early books, was oversimplified.

However, it still stands to reason that it can reshape reality.  I kind of think that's why it's there in the first place.

Both those statements could be applied equally to "Magic" as to "Science." 

[Rasins]

Both those statements could be applied equally to "Magic" as to "Science."

Your point being? *raises eyebrows*

Sufficiently advanced science ... and all that.

[Quantus]

Your point being? *raises eyebrows*

Sufficiently advanced science ... and all that.

That it's not actually Oversimplified at all; rather it's simply that the story and/or narrator have not bothered to get too bogged down in the weeds of how Magic works, most of the time, in the face of good Storytelling.  I mean, I respect the crap out of Tom Clancy, but sometimes he'd wax on and on about random details of military procedure or geopolitical history, to the point where you'd forget what the actual scene was supposed to be. 

To say it was Oversimplified in the beginning implies to me a retcon, the idea that thing worked differently in the earlier books and the rest was added on after-the-fact.  But just about everything that we've been talking about here is stuff that Harry mentioned to one degree or another in the first few books (other than stuff like Mantles and the Gates that were specifically saved for the latter Arc). 

[LordDresden2]

That it's not actually Oversimplified at all; rather it's simply that the story and/or narrator have not bothered to get too bogged down in the weeds of how Magic works, most of the time, in the face of good Storytelling.  I mean, I respect the crap out of Tom Clancy, but sometimes he'd wax on and on about random details of military procedure or geopolitical history, to the point where you'd forget what the actual scene was supposed to be. 

To say it was Oversimplified in the beginning implies to me a retcon, the idea that thing worked differently in the earlier books and the rest was added on after-the-fact.  But just about everything that we've been talking about here is stuff that Harry mentioned to one degree or another in the first few books (other than stuff like Mantles and the Gates that were specifically saved for the latter Arc).

But remember that we're getting it all from first-person narration, and Harry is specifically not infallible, nor are his sources, necessarily.

For ex, Harry tells Karrin early on that the Fallen can't possess you without your permission.  That's what the Council teaches, and Harry believes it.

Several books later, though, it turns out that this isn't quite true, just usually.  Michael tells Harry that yes, one of the Thirty can take your body against your will, under certain circumstances, I think Michael said that drug use could weaken you enough for it to happen, or participation in certain occult rituals or activities could open you up to involuntary possession, there may have been some other things.

So Harry wasn't wrong in what he told Karrin way back when, just not entirely right.  He had an oversimplified view, and maybe so did the Council.

Another example:  throughout the early books, Harry thought the Outer Gates were a metaphor, not a real gate.  Now he 'knows' that they are real gates, physical, material objects...except of course that he's got it oversimplified still:

2015 Grid Daily interview
The Gate seems like something that, if it didn’t start with a consciousness, would develop it over time.  Is that the case?
It probably is, but the consciousness of an inanimate object like that is mostly like that of a mountain.  “I AM HERE.”  And it’s just increasingly aware of its here-ness.  The Gate actually exists very differently than what Harry saw, but that’s how Harry has to interpret it because it’s far out in the Nevernever.  Your mind has to put things into terms it can understand or you go squirrely.  Harry’s got a very good mind for reducing things to simple ideas.  Which most of the Senior Council would say with a roll of their eyes.

[Quantus]

But remember that we're getting it all from first-person narration, and Harry is specifically not infallible, nor are his sources, necessarily.

For ex, Harry tells Karrin early on that the Fallen can't possess you without your permission.  That's what the Council teaches, and Harry believes it.

Several books later, though, it turns out that this isn't quite true, just usually.  Michael tells Harry that yes, one of the Thirty can take your body against your will, under certain circumstances, I think Michael said that drug use could weaken you enough for it to happen, or participation in certain occult rituals or activities could open you up to involuntary possession, there may have been some other things.

So Harry wasn't wrong in what he told Karrin way back when, just not entirely right.  He had an oversimplified view, and maybe so did the Council.

Another example:  throughout the early books, Harry thought the Outer Gates were a metaphor, not a real gate.  Now he 'knows' that they are real gates, physical, material objects...except of course that he's got it oversimplified still:

Again, Incomplete explanation doesnt equal Over simplification.  An Oversimplification is something that has been reduced to the point that it is No Longer accurate, not just incomplete but actually False.  Fallen still do require Permission, every step of the way; said permission is just not not necessarily as explicit or conscious as you first thought.  The Outer Gates were never referred to or Implied to be metaphoric until the moment in CD where were found out they were not; the previous mentions absolutely implied that the term referred to a passage letting Outsiders in and as being something the Gatekeeper guards against, he just didnt expect to see a single Giant monolithic structure (which is entirely reasonable given the use of a plural term); and even that still isnt the whole truth of it, there still might be more Plurality that Harry was able to notice. 

[Mira]

Again, Incomplete explanation doesnt equal Over simplification.  An Oversimplification is something that has been reduced to the point that it is No Longer accurate, not just incomplete but actually False.  Fallen still do require Permission, every step of the way; said permission is just not not necessarily as explicit or conscious as you first thought.  The Outer Gates were never referred to or Implied to be metaphoric until the moment in CD where were found out they were not; the previous mentions absolutely implied that the term referred to a passage letting Outsiders in and as being something the Gatekeeper guards against, he just didnt expect to see a single Giant monolithic structure (which is entirely reasonable given the use of a plural term); and even that still isnt the whole truth of it, there still might be more Plurality that Harry was able to notice.

Over simplification about the Fallen is a danger.  While yes, they cannot dominate you without your permission, as we've seen with Lasciel, especially when she came to Harry as Sheila, they are very good at deception and seduction..  When one is either or both deceived and seduced by whatever permission can be given before the poor host knows what happened to him or her.   

I also agree that more will be revealed about the Gates, and it remains on a need to know basis for a reason..

[Rasins]

That it's not actually Oversimplified at all; rather it's simply that the story and/or narrator have not bothered to get too bogged down in the weeds of how Magic works, most of the time, in the face of good Storytelling.  I mean, I respect the crap out of Tom Clancy, but sometimes he'd wax on and on about random details of military procedure or geopolitical history, to the point where you'd forget what the actual scene was supposed to be. 

To say it was Oversimplified in the beginning implies to me a retcon, the idea that thing worked differently in the earlier books and the rest was added on after-the-fact.  But just about everything that we've been talking about here is stuff that Harry mentioned to one degree or another in the first few books (other than stuff like Mantles and the Gates that were specifically saved for the latter Arc).

I'm not suggesting oversimplification.  I'm saying that magic CAN alter reality.  I thought you were saying that so could Science, and I was giving you the old adage about Sufficiently advanced science/technology appears to be magic.