4 ms·
I like the irony of a media company from the most religious civilisation currently existing calling Apple a cult. At the same time, I can't disagree.
by etherael 17y ago
I like the irony of a media company from the most religious civilisation currently existing calling Apple a cult. At the same time, I can't disagree.
- asolove 17y agoI think that's the point, not the irony: "we believe in an actual deity who does various things, whereas elite Westerners believe in a manufacturer of gadgets."
- hugh3 17y agoAt least I can prove, to a reasonable level of satisfaction, the existence of Apple. Also, they've never told me to kill anybody.
- Qz 17y agoI can prove, to a reasonable level of satisfaction, the existence of Jesus, Moses, and Muhammad. The question is whether we believe what they say (or have said). Also, they've never told me to kill anybody.
- hugh3 17y agoI'm not interested in whether the historical Jesus, Moses or Muhammad existed, I'm interested in the much more dubious existence of their boss. And if Muhammad never told you to kill anybody, he sure wrote a lot of things (or alternatively, transcribed a lot of things dictated by Allah) which are awfully easy to interpret that way: http://www.yoel.info/koranwarpassages.htm http://www.yoel.info/koranwarpassages.htm . Apple, on the other hand, tends to steer well clear of telling anybody to kill anybody, as far as I know.
- nickelplate 17y agoUnless you can prove the existence of a Jesus who has been resurrected, a Moses who walked on the sea or a Muhamad who rode a flying horse to Heaven, I doubt your proof would satisfy most people.
- Qz 17y agoThose are things that people said that Jesus/Moses/Muhammad did, and consequentially not what I'm claiming proof for. My claim is only that they existed. Whether we believe what they said, or what other people say about them, is another question entirely. Going back to the original point: "At least I can prove, to a reasonable level of satisfaction, the existence of Apple." No one is arguing Apple's existence, the debate is whether what Apple says and what is said about Apple is true. The Bible says Jesus was resurrected. Apple says iPad is magical. Pundits say iPad is the future of computing. Is it true? I don't know. But it's all the same kind of mysticism.
- raganwald 17y agoAgree or disagree, even the most rabid Apple haters must agree that this is not a "new phenomenon." Help me understand why the word "hacker" and/or "news" applies here?
- etherael 17y agoI find it useful from the perspective of analysing a phenomenon that as you mention is intimately familiar, but from an extremely different perspective than I am accustomed to. Not just outside the hacker community, but outside the structure of western civilisation. Without attempting to be too critical; more specifically from the perspective of a civilisation intimately familiar with fanatical religious behaviour from an every day perspective. I wouldn't have been able to predict what the kind of analysis such an organisation would come up with based on this familiar part of our landscape. Within that context I find it quite interesting.
- jcl 17y agoI'm not sure you can qualify this as a strictly non-western perspective, given that the article is based mainly on the opinions of an Apple employee, a Utahan consumer psychology professor, and a guy who wrote the books "Cult of Mac" and "Cult of iPod". Those last two people would probably have written the article themselves, given half a chance.
- etherael 17y agoPoint taken, but the fact that the creator of the story made these the talking points says something in itself.
- jcl 17y agoHeh... A one "Andrew Wander"? Not to pre-judge, but I'm not sure his opinion is representative of the Islamic world. :) http://www.reprieve.org.uk/andrewwander http://www.reprieve.org.uk/andrewwander
- Qz 17y ago"from the most religious civilisation currently existing" That's baseless nonsense.
- etherael 17y agoHonest question, is it really? In which sense do the nations which make up modern Middle Eastern civilisation not match with the description "the most religious civilisation currently in existence".
- gloob 17y agoGive me an exhaustive list of precisely which nations you consider to make up the Middle East, and a rigorous definition of "civilization", and I'll see what I can do.
- Qz 17y agoYou made the statement and provided no basis for it, which I called you on, and you want me to explain why your statement is incorrect? Have you been to the Middle East? Do you have experience or evidence to back your claim that they are what you say? Side note: there aren't separate civilizations anymore -- it's human civilization, and maybe you can separate out 'Middle Eastern' culture, but that's a very broad term and your statement still doesn't hold up.
- etherael 17y agoList of countries; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_east#Traditional_definition_of_the_Middle_East http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_east#Traditional_definit... Average rate of atheism; turkey 3% bahrain N/A assumes 0 maximum possible of 9.8% (other) kuwait N/A assumes 0 maximum possible rate of 5% (non islamic) oman N/A assumes 0 less than 5% (non islamic) qatar N/A assumes 0 max possible 22.5% (other) saudi arabia atheism expressly illegal UAE N/A assumes 0 max possible 15 (other) yemen n/A assumes 0 max possible 1 (other) Gaza strip 0 iraq N/a assumes 0 max possible 3 (other) israel 15-37 (split @ 26% :/) Jordan N/A assumes 0 max possible 2 (other) Lebanon N/A assumes 0 max possible 5 (other) Syria 0 (other) West Bank N/A assumes 0 max possible 8 (other) Iran N/A assumes 0 max possible 2 (other) Cyprus 2% Egypt < 1% 18 countries total 3 + 26 + 2 + 1 = 32 / 18 = 1.7% Excuse uberfast formatting, methodology, just check the wikipedia entries then check the atheism rates, combination of the wiki entries on a per country basis + the religion in x articles + demographics of atheism. Compare 1.7% with the figures for a wide variety of western nations referenced at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism#Distribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism#Distrib.... I'm kind of baffled by the idea that this is controversial.
- colinplamondon 17y agoHave you actually ever watched Al Jazeera, or are you just repeating the blather from Fox News? It's one of the most well rounded international news outlets around.
- etherael 17y agoThat doesn't discount my original statement does it? Sincere question, it is a media company and it exists within the structure of the most religious civilisation currently in existence? For the record, I don't watch fox news.
- dagw 17y agoQatar is one of the most liberal Muslim countries in the middle east, and Al Jazeera operates with great autonomy. What exactly do you mean by "exists within the structure of...", and why would that in any way be relevant?
- etherael 17y agoRelevant in the same sense that existance within the structure of a communist country qualifies a person for understanding what is par for the course within a communist country. Or existance within a fascist country qualifies a person for understanding what is par for the course within a fascist country. I must admit I'm quite baffled at the hair trigger reactions here, I wasn't trying to make anything approaching a controversial statement, saying; these guys ought to know what fanatical adherence to religious principles ought to look like, I don't get why that's debatable.
- kareemm 17y agoreligious civilisation != cult. in other words, it's ironic, but only in the alanis morissette way.
- etherael 17y agoI'd dispute the distinction, witness how quickly just the mention of a civilisation as "most religious" is taken as an attack upon that civilisation. Once upon a time perhaps the difference between a religion and a cult was that a cult was a religion without the good press, but the reaction to even characterising a thing as a religion being classed as an attack by so many people seemingly subconsciously, it seems that they're both negative labels now. Can't say it particularly bothers me personally, quite the contrary.
- billswift 17y agoThe only difference between a "cult" and any other religion is numbers. Rather like how Hobbes pointed out that the only difference between superstition and religion is that the latter is publically endorsed.
- edj 17y agoThat's a guilt-by-association argument that doesn't really hold water. In its early days Aljazeera was known for broadcasting dissenting views and was perceived as more objective than state run Middle Eastern media entities. Many of its staff were former BBC. Aljazeer was shut down by the Saudi government because it failed to stick with the party line. It had to relocate to Qatar as a result, where it seems to enjoy more independence. Sources: Control Room (documentary about Aljazeera); Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aljazeera http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aljazeera]
- gamble 17y agoYes, when Aljazeera first began broadcasting the American press had nothing but praise for them. It was only when they refused to parrot the party line on Iraq and 9/11 that the media turned against Aljazeera.
- etherael 17y agoI'm finding it really interesting that people are taking my original statement as an attack on Al Jazeera... All I said was it's a media company that exists within the most religious civilisation in the world. If I were to point out that MSNBC is a media company that exists within the most materialistic civilisation in the world, would this be equally considered as an attack? Curious stuff.