Timeline for Would relatively primitive people really confuse technology with magic?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 3, 2016 at 19:11 | history | edited | Peter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 7 characters in body
|
| Jan 3, 2016 at 19:09 | comment | added | Peter | @JonofAllTrades If your handwriting is really beyond what normally can be expected, become an artist, and if you stick with it long enough I guarantee you someone will refer to your handwriting as "magical", because it is the proper term. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 19:05 | history | edited | Peter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 593 characters in body
|
| Jan 3, 2016 at 18:56 | comment | added | Pieter Geerkens | @JonofAllTrades: Magic does not have to be supernatural in origin, check the Webster's definition. it simply has to be either mysterious or supernatural in origin, making Clarke's Law a tautology - everything one doesn't understand is, by definition, magic. | |
| Jan 2, 2016 at 15:43 | comment | added | user243 | I did read your post. However, by that reasoning, I could claim that my elegant handwriting is beyond natural, and "poof" it's now supernatural. The belief of the other person is what's in question, and you've not offered an argument or evidence that a pre-industrial person is or is not likely to ascribe a supernatural origin to advanced technology. | |
| Jan 2, 2016 at 10:10 | comment | added | Peter | @JonofAllTrades You ignored the word supposedly. If, as you claim, it seems magical, you only need to tell people it's beyond natural, and then that supposedly is the case. | |
| Jan 2, 2016 at 6:05 | comment | added | user243 | No, although a cell phone (to pick a popular example on this page) may seem magical, it is not "beyond what is natural or explainable by natural law." | |
| Jan 1, 2016 at 2:42 | history | edited | Peter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 299 characters in body
|
| Jan 1, 2016 at 2:35 | history | answered | Peter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |