Henke 2022bg

Lundahl (2022k): More on Alchemy and Why Bother Classifying Fiction?

Kevin R. Henke

September 15, 2022

In Henke (2022b), I stated:

“Alchemy is the claim that humans have the ability to transform lead or other common metals into gold or other precious metals. Rather than recognizing that these claims are baseless, Lundahl (2022a) takes them seriously and suggests that they were possibly caused by demonic activity. In a rambling and often vague section in Lundahl (2022a), Mr. Lundahl claims that Theophrastus Paracelsus (1493-1541) of Vienna may have changed a copper coin into gold:

“Lead and gold are badly chosen, but Paracelsus seems - seemed - to have turned a copper penny to a gold coin in Vienna. Not sure whether it was real gold or a demonic sham (he had, they said, a contract with the devil, which he managed to wheedle himself out of without losing the benefits). I don't count him as a prophet of God. It could be a parodic twist to his real reputation too. I do believe he helped out a host - or the tale could be a parody of real legends to discredit them, if it was produced in the Enlightenment:

Die Sage, dass der berühmte Arzt Theophrastus Paracelsus (1493-1541) hier 1538 geweilt und eine schlechte Münze in ein Goldstück verwandelt habe, taucht erst im 18. Jahrhundert auf und wird in der Wiener Publizistik seit 1837 auf das Haus bezogen (Inschrift).

https://www.geschichtewiki.wien.gv.at/K%C3%BCssdenpfennig

Translating: the legend that the well known physician Theophrastus Paracelsus (1493-1541) should have rested here and and turned a bad coin into a piece of gold only appears in the 18th C. and is in the Viennese journalism taken to refer to this hous - Küßdenpfennig - since an inscription in 1837.”

Lundahl (2022a) even suggests that Paracelsus might have had a contract with the devil. Once more, Mr. Lundahl considers groundless claims of demonic activity to explain what was likely a sleight-of-hand trick, if the story about the copper coin ever happened at all. It could be nothing more than a false rumor. Even Mr. Lundahl’s English translation of his German reference at https://www.geschichtewiki.wien.gv.at/K%C3%BCssdenpfennig indicates that the story only appeared in the 18^th century. So, why would Lundahl (2022a) even need to consider the possibility of demonic activity when this entire story can be explained away as a legend or a simple trick? This is another example of superstition. He suggests the presence of demonic activity when such activity is not needed and has no evidential support. Lundahl (2022a) finishes this section by mentioning that Joseph Smith was a Freemason, which I am fully aware of.

Now, the title of Lundahl (2022a) is “Several Types of ‘Supernatural’ Featured in Stories Believed to be True.” However, when his essay is carefully studied there’s absolutely no reason to believe any of the stories that he thinks are true. These stories range from just quoting the Bible to absurd suggestions that demons might assist David Copperfield in his stage shows.” [my emphasis]

Lundahl (2022k) then provides an often confusing reply to the bolded sections in the above quotation from Henke (2022b):

“// Mr. Lundahl claims that Theophrastus Paracelsus (1493-1541) of Vienna may have changed a copper coin into gold: //

I started to show this confidence in the legend of Paracelsus at Küssdenpfennig, then actually withdrew that confidence on fact checking that the oldest known retelling of that legend was from the Enlightenment - two hundred years or so after Paracelsus, and which could have a double motive for inventing that legend : a) discrediting legends by adding unbelievable ones, b) encouraging alchemy (which actually clearly was a thing in Enlightenment times, Goethe being an example of an adept, Cagliostro being a back then famous and often taken seriously fraud).

I made a fact check after my initial statement, and changed my mind, fairly quickly. In Henke's type of purely Academic essays, I would have not let the initial thought stand, I would have sought the confidence of people whose confidence could be shaken by that initial thought.

// Lundahl (2022a) even suggests that Paracelsus might have had a contract with the devil. //

There is a legend (another one than Küssdenpfennig, so not necessarily from the Enlightenment era) about such a contract and how he wheedled himself out of paying his soul, yes. It came to mind when I was, briefly, as in my childhood, considering the Küssdenpfennig legend as correct.”

Apparently, Mr. Lundahl changed his mind at some point and no longer considers it likely that Theophrastus Paracelsus of Vienna actually changed a copper coin into gold or was possibly involved in some sort of a “demonic sham.” Good for him.

Lundahl (2022k) then makes some additional comments on the above bolded statements from Henke (2022b):

“Kevin R. Henke: // So, why would Lundahl (2022a) even need to consider the possibility of demonic activity when this entire story can be explained away as a legend or a simple trick? //

... when the legend could be explained as a fake legend, an apocryphal one, or as recording a simple trick, to use my vocabulary.

Well, because I am classifying different kinds of supernatural, as indicated in the title. Not discussing the veracity of each claim.

Kevin R. Henke: // Now, the title of Lundahl (2022a) is “Several Types of ‘Supernatural’ Featured in Stories Believed to be True.” However, when his essay is carefully studied there’s absolutely no reason to believe any of the stories that he thinks are true. These stories range from just quoting the Bible to absurd suggestions that demons might assist David Copperfield in his stage shows. //

Again, I am in this essay not concerned with proving even one single of these stories, I am only concerned to give a better classification and definition of each than Henke provides.”

As I stated before in Henke (2022b) and Henke (2022ba), why is Mr. Lundahl wasting his time classifying different kinds of baseless supernatural claims? Instead, he should be trying to find good evidence for just one miracle.