Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • 21
    $\begingroup$ The cargo cults ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult ) are probably the most well documented example of people thinking technology is magic, but even there it is interesting how systematic the methods used by the islanders to draw the cargo to themselves were, e.g. control towers. You could call it scientific thinking based on a wrong hypothesis. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 9:48
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ @Lostinfrance That applies to most magic/gods. One has to remember that magic is an attempt at understanding, or controlling the world arround us. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 10:25
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @Lostinfrance: Most "everyday-superstition" (XYZ means bad luck kind of rules) is extremely systematic, and possibly even originated from observations. It probably very much is a seemingly "confirmed hypothesis", merely flawed due to completely inadequate sampling. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 30, 2015 at 10:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ About "Big Loud Machines" - we can also note that when the first guns (arquebuses) were used in the battlefield, they did more damage by the fear they inspired because of the noise and smoke, than the effective bullets reaching the enemies. The same thing happened with the first native americans fighting against the conquistadores $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 30, 2015 at 10:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hrm... thinking about my last comment... I think magical thinking occurs when one believes their model to be right instead of an approximation, and begins inventing an extended, formal system around it to account for behaviors the original model could not accommodate. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 31, 2015 at 5:07