New forum theme up and running!
Originally posted by MeiscoolAlchemy was, in a nutshell, the transformation of one element to another, via magic. Chemistry is the reactions of elements to produce a compound. In likeness, they both wanted the same thing to happen, but Alchemy deals with the impossible, such as turning lead to gold, and chemistry deals with the plausible, such as turning iron to rust. I wouldn't say that they are the same, or that they are completely different. I'd say they are just similar.
In its origins and and in its essence, alchemy is spiritual. The search for the alchemical gold is the search for wisdom, light, perfection, and enlightenment. In past times there was no separation between science and religion/spirituality, and thus we find alchemy mixed with other areas of 'science'. In Western Europe, alchemy used many symbols from chemical science, probably to disguise their actions during times of persecution by the Catholic Church. But it also allowed them to use a language to express spiritual experiences for which there was no vocabulary. Over time many people, misunderstanding its essence, got involved in their own 'alchemy', only looking to make physical gold. Some were indeed charlatans and the reputation of alchemy became clouded. When reading numerous alchemical texts, one easily gets lost in the manifold symbols, contradictions, claims, processes, and so on. It is obvious that each writer, for as far as he was honest, had their own interpretation of what alchemy was, or what the symbols meant. Some alchemists made their texts intentionally confusing, so only an experienced colleague knew what the writing was about. But other writers were very clear, and with almost no obscure symbolic language wrote about their experiences. From those writings it is obvious that alchemy is about the discovery of the spiritual nature of man, of nature and of the cosmos, and especially about one's own development.
The common perception of alchemists is that they were pseudo-scientists, liars and charlatans, who attempted to turn lead into gold, believing that the universe was composed of the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water, and spent most of their time concocting miraculous remedies, poisons, and magic potions.Although some alchemists were indeed poseurs, liars and charlatans, most were well-meaning and intelligent scholars and distinguished scientists such as Isaac Newton and Robert Boyle. These innovators attempted to explore the nature of chemical substances and processes. They had to rely on experimentation, traditional know-how, rules of thumb and speculative thought in their attempts to uncover the mysteries of the physical universe.At the same time, it was clear to the alchemists that "something" was generally being conserved in chemical processes, even in the most dramatic changes of physical state and appearance; that is, that substances contained some "principles" that could be hidden under many outer forms, and revealed by proper manipulation. Throughout the history of the discipline, alchemists struggled to understand the nature of these principles, and find some order and sense in the results of their chemical experiments—which were often undermined by impure or poorly characterized reagents, the lack of quantitative measurements, and confusing and inconsistent nomenclature.The common perception of alchemists is that they were pseudo-scientists, liars and charlatans, who attempted to turn lead into gold, believing that the universe was composed of the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water, and spent most of their time concocting miraculous remedies, poisons, and magic potions.Although some alchemists were indeed poseurs, liars and charlatans, most were well-meaning and intelligent scholars and distinguished scientists such as Isaac Newton and Robert Boyle. These innovators attempted to explore the nature of chemical substances and processes. They had to rely on experimentation, traditional know-how, rules of thumb and speculative thought in their attempts to uncover the mysteries of the physical universe.At the same time, it was clear to the alchemists that "something" was generally being conserved in chemical processes, even in the most dramatic changes of physical state and appearance; that is, that substances contained some "principles" that could be hidden under many outer forms, and revealed by proper manipulation. Throughout the history of the discipline, alchemists struggled to understand the nature of these principles, and find some order and sense in the results of their chemical experiments—which were often undermined by impure or poorly characterized reagents, the lack of quantitative measurements, and confusing and inconsistent nomenclature.
Originally posted by TrevlacQuoteOriginally posted by MeiscoolAlchemy was, in a nutshell, the transformation of one element to another, via magic. Chemistry is the reactions of elements to produce a compound. In likeness, they both wanted the same thing to happen, but Alchemy deals with the impossible, such as turning lead to gold, and chemistry deals with the plausible, such as turning iron to rust. I wouldn't say that they are the same, or that they are completely different. I'd say they are just similar.How can someone be so completely wrong?QuoteIn its origins and and in its essence, alchemy is spiritual. The search for the alchemical gold is the search for wisdom, light, perfection, and enlightenment. In past times there was no separation between science and religion/spirituality, and thus we find alchemy mixed with other areas of 'science'. In Western Europe, alchemy used many symbols from chemical science, probably to disguise their actions during times of persecution by the Catholic Church. But it also allowed them to use a language to express spiritual experiences for which there was no vocabulary. Over time many people, misunderstanding its essence, got involved in their own 'alchemy', only looking to make physical gold. Some were indeed charlatans and the reputation of alchemy became clouded. When reading numerous alchemical texts, one easily gets lost in the manifold symbols, contradictions, claims, processes, and so on. It is obvious that each writer, for as far as he was honest, had their own interpretation of what alchemy was, or what the symbols meant. Some alchemists made their texts intentionally confusing, so only an experienced colleague knew what the writing was about. But other writers were very clear, and with almost no obscure symbolic language wrote about their experiences. From those writings it is obvious that alchemy is about the discovery of the spiritual nature of man, of nature and of the cosmos, and especially about one's own development. Text: Copyright, Dirk Gillabel, 2003 sun@hvi.netAhh, historical fact. Gotta love it.I repeat Alchemy is NOT chemistry and does NOT predate chemistry. Neither can be compared to each other. Stupid animes like FullMetal Alchemist screw up the reputation of Alchemy.[/B]
Originally posted by TrevlacMaybe.
