Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I think you got a couple downvotes because you took the quote far too literally. The person who said it did not believe in magic and was not trying to compare a nonexistent supernatural force to hyper advanced technology. If you look up the quote I'm sure you'll find some essays about what Arthur was getting at.
For a very simple example, suppose an alien showed up and had antigravity tech built into their clothing or even as a cybernetic implant, that let them hover around in the air with no discernible means of propulsion. The average modern human would probably look at that and think "fuckin magic..." because you literally can't understand or recognize what is going on or how it works.
Or another example using 'time travel' instead of aliens. Imagine putting a medieval peasant in the back seat of a fighter jet taking off from an aircraft carrier, or in a VR helmet to experience a virtual trip around the galaxy, zooming around planets and stars. In both cases there are unfathomable things right in front of their eyes everywhere they look. They would have no fucking clue what was going on in either case. To you and me those are normal, understandable things. To the medieval peasant, it's magic.
Well yeah, but that's why I dislike the quote. It doesn't say what it means. Every example of what it intends to convey kinda falls back to the spruce vs pine thing to the uneducated eye. It doesn't matter if I understand how the alien antigravity socks work -if they're tech, they're tech. Hell, I don't understand how the cell phone I'm posting from works. It could literally be filled with tiny wizards who are actively casting a spell to send my thoughts to Lemmy - I dunno, and I can't verify. I'm reasonably confident that's not the case: despite all the functions this device is capable of that do indeed feel magical, that doesn't make it magical.
The quote doesn't say it is magic though, actually. It just says, that from our perspective, it's indistinguishable from magic.
It does not say from our perspective, it just says they're indistinguishable. Which is incorrect.
from our perspective is implied in every sentence ever.
And no, you can't expect phrases to "say what they mean"----that would just require them to include more phrases, etc..
See? That's what I like about the quote. It points to the fact that the difference is in the eye of the beholder.