Alchemy

So yeah, Alchemy. I decide to make a thread here as to not clutter up the "lesser known religions" thread in the Yack Fest. So where the alchemists the first scientists, or where their works fully spiritual, with the scientific achievements only secondary? How much of the alchemical worldview was a proto-science and how much of it was fully occult? How did the Renaissance change both? Was Jung correct in his belief that alchemists were the first psychologists? Let's discuss here.

edited 15th May '12 5:00:43 AM by SantosLHalper

I haven't looked into the subject much, but the way I see it, it was not so much a combination of science and occult, as it was a science involving the occult. Considering the times, when the paranormal was considered to be real, it wasn't that odd for someone to try to think about it scientifically and figuring out the rules of Magic A Is Magic A.

While there were some hilarious fuck-ups (drinking quicksilver to gain immortality, for example), it also stumbled across some very real discoveries and furthered the field of chemistry mostly by creating technology required for experimentation.

Basically, much like so many other things from those ages, it may have gotten stuff wrong, but it also got stuff right, or enabled later scientists to get stuff right.

edited 15th May '12 5:17:39 AM by Kayeka

Wow. That's pretty much how I would describe it. However, there are a lot of mystics who believe that alchemical contributions to science and chemistry were nothing more than mental (or supernatural) procedures made physical.

Granted, I feel that there's nothing wrong with using the metaphor of alchemy as a sort of psychological therapy, but I'm rather unhappy when people say "this is exactly what happened", when the main "evidence" for it was not much more than the speculations of Karl Jung.

While the advances in chemistry cannot be ignored, there's no getting away from the fact that the goal was to move oneself, and by extension the world, gradually closer to spiritual and physical perfection, rather than a mere mundane 'better living through chemistry' affair.

Well, I wouldn't know about the psychological stuff. Like I said, I haven't looked much into this subject. All I know about alchemy comes from pop-culture and the occasional time where my teachers thought it would be appropriate to give a lesson on the history of science.

I think there was some philosophy in there as well. Like with the whole 'turn lead to gold' thing representing the desire for metamorphosis towards perfection, or something like that. The gold was merely symbolic, and they were actually trying to find a way to create the perfect human. Or something.

EDIT: yeah, what he said.

edited 15th May '12 5:48:23 AM by Kayeka

I think Alchemy as a form of art is the current perception of our general populace. Back in the past? It was a pioneer in chemistry, that's what I think. It seems very nonsensical to us nowadays because we have accurate chemical knowledge and period tables to debunk them, but remember, back then there weren't much means to prove that Chemical A is Chemical A and that Reaction X is Reaction X. They just went with hypothesis, test, result and conclusion, much like what we're doing. They had to start somewhere to reach their intended finish line

As I recall, the use of Bismuth as a cure for stomach ulcers was viewed as folklore for a long time. When medicine discovered Helicobacter Pylori as a main cause of ulcers, the fact that people had once used Bismuth as a cure gave a valuable clue in how to treat it. Seems that on some occasions it would have been enough to fight the infection alone, although it works much better when combined with antibiotics.

Western alchemy sucks. Taoist alchemy was awesome.

In his time, Isaac Newton took alchemy more seriously than he took the theory of gravity. All of his laws of motion took second place to the transfiguration of base metals into gold. http://www.alchemylab.com/isaac_newton.htm is a bit of a primer. Wikipedia will no doubt go into further detail.

Wasn't there a myth that Da Vinci turned a golden lion into a bouquet of flowers or something like that?

Sure it caused a lot of problems, but I'm sure the answer wasn't sealing it off and causing a slow, agonizing apocalypse.

In his time, Isaac Newton took alchemy more seriously than he took the theory of gravity. All of his laws of motion took second place to the transfiguration of base metals into gold. http://www.alchemylab.com/isaac_newton.htm is a bit of a primer. Wikipedia will no doubt go into further detail.

I believe this an appropriate addition to this comment: Why Did Isaac Newton Believe in Alchemy? Warning: Long video.

AFAIK, you couldn't call alchemy "science" in the modern sense of the word, but they probably got a few things right by accident nonetheless.

However, I think at least the both of us can agree that Alchemy involved experimentation : an act science can never lack in its practice as well

Western alchemy was part of what the Renaissance called Magia Naturalis — magic which did not involve commerce with spiritual entities, be they benevolent or malevolent, but that rather expoited the forces which resided inside physical matter. And like alchemy, Magia Naturalis was a mixture of many different things — Dalla Porta's book on the topic, for example, contained geological observations, recipes for perfume-making and glass-coloring, cryptography and so on; and Albertus Magnus, the teacher of Aquinas and one among the greatest scientists of the Middle Ages, also wrote about astrology and alchemy (there are some texts which suggest that he succeeded in creating the Philosopher's Stone, but they are not authentic).

They got many things wrong, no doubt. But I have some sympathy for the idea that investigations in the nature of reality elevate humankind, that by learning how to manipulate the elements of Creation we rise towards greater perfection, and that ultimately contributing to the understanding of the cosmos is contributing to the spiritual advancement of humankind.

I've found, after a cursory look at Wikipedia, that alchemy's pretty interesting. I'm sure I can squeeze four or five books out of the idea.

Here's what I've come up so far:

1. Four books.

2. Four titles, respectively, and all coming from the four stages for making the ''Magnum Opus" - Nigredo, Albedo, Citrinitas, and Rubedo.

3. Each book will have a personal theme on their own that is related to the stage of alchemy that they're related to. The theme of Nigredo, for example, is about "confronting the shadow within."

So that's why I come to ask: Does anybody know any good alchemy sources?

edited 7th Apr '17 10:22:24 AM by fredhot16

Isn't alchemy the predecessor of modern chemistry and physics though. Yeah most of its was drinking mercury and eating lead, but it gave us gunpowder, Hohenheim, and Newton.

I've done some research on Alchemy before for my own stories, but I've gone on hiatus (can I even say that considering I haven't actually published anything?) so I'm a little foggy. Still, I'd recommend checking out this site not only for alchemy but also other occult things: http://www.sacred-texts.com/alc/index.htm

Also when looking for good resources it helps to look for specific alchemists like Paracelsus^note Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim (but everyone just calls him Paracelsus for the obvious reason), Mary the Prophetess^note Also known as Mary the Jewess. or Hermes Trismegistus^note Also know as Mercurius ter Maximus, both names meaning "Hermes/Mercury the Thrice Great"., the mythological founder of alchemy.

IIRC alchemists are also credited with helping to develop the Scientific Method. Since they often recorded their experiments, noting how different changes to their works caused different results.

edited 7th Apr '17 2:04:10 PM by FalseDichotomy

Given its propensity to be related to "HEY LETS MAKE GOLD OUT OF NOTHING" we could also call alchemy the first organized and desperate attempt at a get-rich-quick scheme.

Then again, they also aimed for a Panacea, but, whatever. I will take the funnier option.

Of course, There's Edward Kelly and John Dee, two of the more famous alchemists in Western Alchemy (the latter being the reason where the codename 007 came from, apparently).

Edward Kelley was also the main antagonist of Nioh with John Dee being the guy who gave him his orders. Of course, in that game he just had straight up magical powers.

edited 7th Apr '17 9:09:48 PM by M84