XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: Taemon@zonnet.nl   
      
   On 19-5-2014 22:34, Wayne Brown wrote:   
   > In alt.fan.tolkien Paul S. Person  wrote:   
   >> On Sun, 18 May 2014 21:32:16 +0200, Taemon  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 18-5-2014 7:13, Clams Canino wrote:   
   >>>> "Taemon"  wrote in message news:lk7702   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Any sufficently advanced engineering is indistinguishable from magic.   
   >>>>>>> That's not true, actually.   
   >>>>>> Course it is, if it is sufficiently advanced.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> It can be explained, and it can be used by everyone. So, no.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It's unlikely that someone who used such "magic" to your detriment would   
   >>>> much care to give you a recipe or explaination.   Therefore - it remains   
   >>>> "magic" to the beholder.   
   >>>   
   >>> Well - that is really not the point.   
   >>   
   >> /That/ is exactly the point.   
   >>   
   >> This isn't about what something /is/, it is about how something   
   >> /appears/ to a sufficiently-unadvanced individual.   
   >   
   > Exactly right.  When two things are "indistinguishable," it doesn't mean   
   > that they're the same; it means they can't be told apart.   
      
   But they can! Maybe not by you or me, but they /can/! I'm thoroughly   
   enjoying this discussion :-)  Very interesting.   
      
   > Clarke wasn't   
   > saying in his famous quote that technology can advance far enough to   
   > *become* magic; he's saying that it can advance far enough beyond   
   > someone's ability to understand it for that person to be unable to   
   > tell the difference.   
      
   That doesn't work either. I can tell if something is magic. It's easy;   
   magic doesn't exist.   
      
   No, don't go rolling your eyes. I'm very serious. I remember when I   
   first held an iPad in my hands. All the things that machine can do, all   
   the different kinds of input it reacts to, all without generating any   
   heat or sound. It was unbelievable. I remember thinking "it's like   
   magic!". No doubt someone from an earlier age would have thought it was.   
   But I didn't. Because I know there is no such thing. And so I know that   
   I could learn how such a thing works. If you watch a magician at work,   
   do you believe it's a trick?   
      
   Technology is only indistinguishable from magic if you believe magic exists.   
      
   > If an engineer uses some hitherto-unknown principle of physics to build   
   > an anti-gravity generator that looks like a magic wand and uses it to   
   > levitate objects, then how could someone who is unable to understand   
   > the physics prove that it's not magic?   
      
   They couldn't, obviously. But not being able to prove something isn't X   
   was never an argument.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)