[NTLK] 2010 thanks and a quick question...
jackmjenkins at gmail.com
Sat Mar 13 22:44:25 EST 2010
It wasn't you, it was my unclear writing (I, too, blame Saturdays). I meant that I wrote a paper in RESPONSE to the article. Basically, I used the article as a real-world example of the debate between Clifford Geertz and Tala Asad about what "defines" religion.
In short, I called the article problematic It was coincidental (seriously, I promise) that I had just acquired a Newton a week before reading the article. I only saw the article because a guy sitting in front of me during lecture was reading it on his laptop. I leaned over, asked what it was about, and proudly showed him my MP 130. He was weirded out for a second, and then, naturally, was spellbound by the handwriting recognition.
Anyway, I was just curious as to what you all thought about the ORIGINAL article...
Thanks for asking!
~~~ On 2010/03/13 21:45, Jack Jenkins at jackmjenkins at gmail.com wrote ~~~
> Also, on a completely unrelated note, I'm a student at Harvard Divinity School
> and just wrote a paper about the "Religiosity of the Apple Newton Community"
> published a few years back. I'm curious - did anyone have strong reactions
> (for OR against) that article on this list?
Sorry, but I just want to make sure what you mean ( I blame Saturdays: I
stop thinking after lunchtime on Saturdays). Are you saying you've written
a paper in response to an article that came out some years ago? Would that
be the Muniz/Schau article, or have I completely got the wrong end of the
More information about the NewtonTalk