Timeline for Would relatively primitive people really confuse technology with magic?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 4 at 3:15 | history | edited | jmoreno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Changed concept to belief in
|
| Jan 19, 2016 at 5:13 | comment | added | Jay | Yes, the point of my previous post was that I was trying to say that a definition like "doing the impossible" is not useful. I was struggling to come up with a definition that matches our intuitive feel of what we mean by the word, but couldn't think of anything. Yours is pretty good. | |
| Jan 19, 2016 at 2:13 | comment | added | jmoreno | @Jay: no, doing the impossible is a terrible definition of magic. A scientific type definition would be something like "a process whereby the physical world is effected via ritual and/or will power. Also the means used to communicate with the spirts of ghosts, places or animals". That's probably not exactly what someone that believes in magic would say, but it's a lot closer than "impossible". Those that believe in magic don't consider it impossible, they consider it not only possible but LIKELY. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 22:22 | comment | added | Jay | Yes, we must wrestle with definitions of "what is magic". If you define "magic" as "doing the impossible", than presumably anyone who agrees with that definition must inevitably agree that there is no such thing as magic. If someday someone was able to prove that, say, ghosts really exist and really are some element of the personality of a dead person that has survived death, we might at that point say that he has proven that ghosts are not supernatural after all but are science. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 22:19 | comment | added | Jay | Not to get into a debate, but: Some psychics claim to be capable of "distant viewing", seeing a far away object, even if it's in a locked box, etc. Of course we can accomplish the same thing with technology, like a video camera connected to the Internet. The fact that technology and magic can/could achieve the same result does not lead me to conclude that the psychic really has magic powers, nor that the technology is really magic. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 2:45 | comment | added | jmoreno | @Jay: I did say "concept", but what I meant was concept and befief in....if your belief in "magic" is limited to "unbelievable things in stories told by Fred", I wouldn't expect you to attribute anthing except stories by Fred as having any magic. If on the other hand, you use believe magic is a viable answer for just about anything verifiable, there's a good chance technology can be used to achieve to achieve a reasonably close fascimile. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 2:14 | comment | added | Jay | Hmm, not necessarily. If someone showed me a black box that did something that I could not explain, that was as far beyond my knowledge of science as electricity might be beyond an ancient Greeks, I can't imagine that I would therefore conclude it was magic. I think I'd assume it was technology that I don't happen to understand. Simple proof: I like to think I'm a smart guy, but there are lots of gadgets out there that I don't understand. I don't suppose that any of them are magic. I'd guess most Americans have no idea how computers or cell phones work, but they don't think they're magic. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 1:26 | history | answered | jmoreno | CC BY-SA 3.0 |