12 ms·

I'm sure it was an interesting experience for the author, and it probably doesn't make much difference that he's describing the month of 2013-11, but comes with

by Jedd 8y ago

I'm sure it was an interesting experience for the author, and it probably doesn't make much difference that he's describing the month of 2013-11, but comes with an abundance of false dichotomies along with forced and uncomfortable parallels to various religions (weirdly no mention of the Amish, who are perhaps most famous for eschewing all technology all the time).

dragonwriter 8y ago
> weirdly no mention of the Amish, who are perhaps most famous for eschewing all technology all the time The Amish do not eschew all technology all the time. http://www.discoverlancaster.com/towns-and-heritage/amish-country/amishandtechnology.asp http://www.discoverlancaster.com/towns-and-heritage/amish-co...
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  True. When I lived in Maryland I often went to an Amish market and they seemed pretty tech-savvy.
  - hndamien 8y ago
    They are very selective with technology.
- Jedd 8y ago
  Okay ... neat story, but actually emphasises even more the arbitrary parallels with TFA, and the idea that some technology, up to some vintage, is kosher. f.e. the old camera, the soviet era mechanical watch, etc. I understand it's 'a month without computers' rather than 'a month without technology', but nonetheless the claimed parallels to religious abstinence are pretty dubious.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    The Amish are far from arbitrary with what technology they allow. When new tech arrives they experiment with it, and then see what affects it causes on the community based on a few metrics they value highly. When the car came, they saw that cars made families and communities live further apart. They didn’t like that, so they went back to horses. When the phone came they liked the ability to connect and the ability to call for emergency services, but they didn’t like the gossip factor. So they installed their phones in separate booths outside their homes, so everyone can see who is using the phone too much.
    - Jedd 8y ago
      Well this has gotten weird. The various Amish sects use differing oral guidelines based on myriad interpretations of a dubious collection of contradictory historical anecdotes in order to come up with the rules for their particular outpost at that particular time. This leads to situations where cars are used, but not owned, as distinct from your 'so they went back to horses' summary. (I'm sure the car thing varies between sects.) Similarly, some sects realise phones are important for business and ensuring a viable lifestyle for their offspring, so they may be installed in some business locations, but not in homes. Unless that home is where the dairy farmer lives, and it's deemed important they have quick access to call a veterinarian. (etc) Rules around button usage based on gender, day of week, visibility of the button itself, and village you're in at the time? There may be post hoc explanations and fascinating (mis)interpretations of some short stories published around and after the 2nd century, but I think it's safe to call it arbitrary.
      - keiferski 8y ago
        The fact that there are rules which have reasons makes them not arbitrary, by definition
        Jedd 8y ago
        > The fact that there are rules which have reasons makes them not arbitrary, by definition Well, perhaps. But two things: 1. rules with alleged reasons (for someone) doesn't mean they're reasonable rules for everyone else, and 2. I initially bemoaned arbitrary parallels with TFA -- not that Amish made arbitrary rulings -- so, as noted, I'm now in the weird position where I'm defending something I didn't claim. (Anyway, you may be assuming arbitrary has a single meaning, that of being a synonym for 'random', which isn't entirely accurate. No two words are 100% synonyms, after all.) EDIT: Actually, 3 things. Amish rules are not consistent amongst all amish, as I noted above -- there's a lot of disparity between different communities, which suggests that the reasons are not especially objective (otherwise they'd all reach the same conclusion), which in turn leads to a conclusion there's some arbitrary (in the personal whim sense) aspects to them.

by Jedd 8y ago

dragonwriter 8y ago

> weirdly no mention of the Amish, who are perhaps most famous for eschewing all technology all the time The Amish do not eschew all technology all the time. http://www.discoverlancaster.com/towns-and-heritage/amish-country/amishandtechnology.asp http://www.discoverlancaster.com/towns-and-heritage/amish-co...

maxxxxx 8y ago
True. When I lived in Maryland I often went to an Amish market and they seemed pretty tech-savvy.
- hndamien 8y ago
  They are very selective with technology.
Jedd 8y ago
Okay ... neat story, but actually emphasises even more the arbitrary parallels with TFA, and the idea that some technology, up to some vintage, is kosher. f.e. the old camera, the soviet era mechanical watch, etc. I understand it's 'a month without computers' rather than 'a month without technology', but nonetheless the claimed parallels to religious abstinence are pretty dubious.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  The Amish are far from arbitrary with what technology they allow. When new tech arrives they experiment with it, and then see what affects it causes on the community based on a few metrics they value highly. When the car came, they saw that cars made families and communities live further apart. They didn’t like that, so they went back to horses. When the phone came they liked the ability to connect and the ability to call for emergency services, but they didn’t like the gossip factor. So they installed their phones in separate booths outside their homes, so everyone can see who is using the phone too much.
  - Jedd 8y ago
    Well this has gotten weird. The various Amish sects use differing oral guidelines based on myriad interpretations of a dubious collection of contradictory historical anecdotes in order to come up with the rules for their particular outpost at that particular time. This leads to situations where cars are used, but not owned, as distinct from your 'so they went back to horses' summary. (I'm sure the car thing varies between sects.) Similarly, some sects realise phones are important for business and ensuring a viable lifestyle for their offspring, so they may be installed in some business locations, but not in homes. Unless that home is where the dairy farmer lives, and it's deemed important they have quick access to call a veterinarian. (etc) Rules around button usage based on gender, day of week, visibility of the button itself, and village you're in at the time? There may be post hoc explanations and fascinating (mis)interpretations of some short stories published around and after the 2nd century, but I think it's safe to call it arbitrary.
    - keiferski 8y ago
      The fact that there are rules which have reasons makes them not arbitrary, by definition
      - Jedd 8y ago
        > The fact that there are rules which have reasons makes them not arbitrary, by definition Well, perhaps. But two things: 1. rules with alleged reasons (for someone) doesn't mean they're reasonable rules for everyone else, and 2. I initially bemoaned arbitrary parallels with TFA -- not that Amish made arbitrary rulings -- so, as noted, I'm now in the weird position where I'm defending something I didn't claim. (Anyway, you may be assuming arbitrary has a single meaning, that of being a synonym for 'random', which isn't entirely accurate. No two words are 100% synonyms, after all.) EDIT: Actually, 3 things. Amish rules are not consistent amongst all amish, as I noted above -- there's a lot of disparity between different communities, which suggests that the reasons are not especially objective (otherwise they'd all reach the same conclusion), which in turn leads to a conclusion there's some arbitrary (in the personal whim sense) aspects to them.