| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| A 1956 encyclopaedia's view on the computer |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-06-08 23:07:13 |
| Two weeks ago, my grandmother passed away - the last grandparent I had left. As those of you with experience in dealing with deceased family members know, the funeral is only the start; the next part is taking care of the deceased's affairs, which includes going through all their belongings to determine what to do with them. I took care of my grandmother's extensive book collection, and while doing so, I hit something that fascinated me to no end: a six-volume Christian Encyclopaedia from 1956. In it, I found something I just had to share with OSNews. |
|
| RE: Comment on Religion and Evolution |
| By Modafinil on 2012-06-09 17:35:48 |
|
> Well all this science vs religion nonsense is a new thing. Gregor Mendel for example was monk and even though we Charles Darwin is the father of the evolution theory Mendel discovered how inheritance works and described it in great detail. ~700 years prior to Mendel: http://www.osnews.com/thread?521... |
 - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: Dankjewel! |
| By reez on 2012-06-09 17:36:21 |
|
> I wonder, are all Germans able to guess what a Dutch text means and vice versa ? The vocabulary of the two languages looks very similar from a foreigner's point of view... German is my native language and while I can indeed understand what most texts mean it is not like I could do that with single words. A lot of words simply look too similar, but that's also true for most other languages (not in that extend though). A short example. I could also guess the English word hound, because in German it is Hund, but dog doesn't come close to anything I know. Fish and Fisch is another example, where both words are even pronounced in the same way. I think for German speaking people that never learned English Old English (think of Shakespeare) would even be easier to understand, because it's closer to German (English is part of the German language family) and Dutch is even closer. I can guess a lot of stuff, when I have a longer text and it's a topic that's not too complex, but it's still kinda far from understanding. Try to read German or Dutch stuff. If you spend a while on a text as an English speaking person you most likely also get a lot of stuff (on the front Page of German Wikipedia for example), even if it's harder than German and Dutch. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Comment on Religion and Evolution |
| By reez on 2012-06-09 17:59:46 |
|
> > Well all this science vs religion nonsense is a new thing. Gregor Mendel for example was monk and even though we Charles Darwin is the father of the evolution theory Mendel discovered how inheritance works and described it in great detail. ~700 years prior to Mendel: http://www.osnews.com/thread?521... Nice example. Thanks! And also think that for most of the time monks were the scientists. They were the ones able to read, the ones that cared about books, had libraries and even did math. Philosophy and I am not talking about the "moral of the bible" (if you can call it like that) is also something that's heavily related to religious people in past time. There were witch burnings and book burnings (even though they cared for libraries) and lots of bad things, but these were things that usually have been done by people that had a grief for power and not by monks for example. One simply has to distinguish between believers and people that are like (or even are) populist and corrupt politicians. Acting like every priest is a rapist, hates women/homosexuals and just is out for the money is like saying every German is a Nazi, every mathematician is a pale, emotionless, asocial outsider, every American is gun fanatic, arch conservative, war loving capitalist with tons of American flags or every black person is a drug dealer. It's simply far from true. What's really bad, no matter what is when people blindly follow someone. That does never work out in a good way, but happens everywhere. Religion caused people to do the right thing just like it caused people to do the exact opposite. I mean there are people questioning the church (which also isn't that big evil thing), because they actually read the bible and thought about their religion. People did a lot of stupid things in the name of freedom, democracy and many other things, but hey that's what people sometimes to. Doing shit and learning from it is what brought us this far and it's what scientific research is mostly based on. Oh and if someone is wrong it doesn't mean you are right. Maybe it's also just becoming aware of being wrong most of the time. At least I am, so please folks don't burn me if I am again. ;) |
| - Score: 2 |
| Thanks for sharing, Tom. :) |
| By dionicio on 2012-06-09 18:02:33 |
|
My first computing marvel was an Olivetti adding machine.. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ana... |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE: Comment on Religion and Evolution |
| By Sodki on 2012-06-09 18:15:15 |
|
I liked your post, but have two comments to make: > Well all this science vs religion nonsense is a new thing. The truth is it's all about power and depends on who's in charge at the time. The catholic church, for example, has fought science many times in the past, but has supported it many times as well. Like you said, many scientists were people of the church. Most of the problems arise when science claims that something that the church has been telling for centuries is wrong. The aftermath depends on those in power. > It even goes further than that. Saying there is no god without proving it is from a scientific point of view just as wrong as stating their is one without proving it. Not really. The burden of proof lies with those that claim that god exists. Non believers don't really have to prove anything since, by default, god doesn't exist, just like the flying spaghetti monster. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Religion |
| By twitterfire on 2012-06-09 18:46:35 |
|
Thom, I want to offer my sincere condolences on your recent loss. However you can hardly consider someone orthodox unless he or she isn't orthodox. Reformed is reformed. By stretching your imagination you can consider the Catholic Church as being somehow orthodox. But as any informed man knows, only the Orthodox Church is orthodox, hence the name. You can't be "reformed" or "protestant" and orthodox same time. It's the same in all religions, there are orthodox christians and reformed christians, there are orthodox jews and reformed jews, there are orthodox buddhists and reformed buddhists, there are reformed muslims and orthodox muslims. Again, I'm deeply sorry for your loss and I'm sorry to bring this issue up. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: interesting look back |
| By ARUmar on 2012-06-09 18:53:28 |
| I concur , i think its more of a matter of the writers of the encyclopedia having the notion of `belief through knowledge` as opposed to `knowledge through belief` its fine and all to have faith in religion as long as its based on knowledge (facts and proof rather than superstition) |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: Dankjewel! |
| By steve_s on 2012-06-09 18:55:31 |
|
It's not really too surprising that Dutch and German look similar. Back in the not too distant past there was Low German and High German. These languages changed and evolved and are now known as Dutch and German respectively. There's been sufficient drift now that they are distinct and different languages, but the root is common and there's great similarities. I don't speak either language, but I studied German for a year at school, and was a founder at an Anglo-Dutch company so, for a few years, I'd regularly visit Amsterdam. (As a Brit, it's really hard to learn any Dutch, since the locals would all reply to any Dutch I spoke in English. I got about as far as ordering beers and food, and counting to ten.) Dutch sounds like a very laid back version of German - about exactly what you'd expect, given the people. :-) Several of my Dutch colleagues had learnt German, and all said it was very easy for them to learn. A lot of it is just a matter of speaking in a different accent. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[4]: Sorry for the religious discussion |
| By dionicio on 2012-06-09 19:01:07 |
| Everything, even code, must be periodically rewritten -reworded- in order to preserve its purpose. |
| - Score: 1 |
| Thanks |
| By steve_s on 2012-06-09 19:06:02 |
|
Thanks for the article Thom. For me it was a tangential reminder of a time when I was frequently visiting the head office of a former company I'd co-founded in Amsterdam. A reminder of the Dutch people and spirit. You, sir, are a credit to your grandparents. |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |