Religion has nothing to do with tings logic or rational. I can imagine many soldiers in a tight spot has prayed to his god "please, dont let my machine gun jam now!"
Does it work? Thats probably questionable in our mundane world, but in the 40K universe, these things does actually do, so Im not at all surpised over the religious aproch to tecnology.
Eivind
>
> Fra: Daryl Lonnon <dlonnon_at_...>
> Dato: 2002/05/22 Wed PM 06:07:21 CEST
> Til: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Emne: Re: Sv: Sv: Sv: Sv: RE: [NetEpic ML] GW vs Epic questions
>
> rune.karlsen6_at_... wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Using psychers has nothing to do with religion in my book. Its
> > when you start calling people "priests" or such and believe that
> > a deity is behind the technology that we are talking religion.
> > I can understand that the technology has been lost for millennia,
> > but even then a fairly evolved race will recognize the difference
> > between religious writings and actual technical descriptions.
>
> < cut some stuff >
>
> I was always under the impression that much of imperials "big" technology
> (warp engines, void sheild generators, etc.) was effected (at least
> somewhat) by the psychic field they were used in. So praying
> that the warp engines didn't break down ... might very well keep
> the warp engines from breaking down. Since there were quantifiable
> results that occured from placing the trappings of religion around
> the use of some machinery ... it became codified as standard
> Imperial doctrine. (i.e. "The captain will now lead the crew in
> prayer for the continued function of the warp guidance computer",
> removing the gargoyles from the Imperial battlecruiser results in
> the shields failing 20% more often, etc.).
>
> Over time this spread out to machinery that had no warp connection
> (i.e. praying that your bolter will continue to function).
>
> Just a random thought,
> Daryl
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Received on Thu May 23 2002 - 08:25:45 UTC