The fact is that the world is divided between users of the Macintosh computer and users of MS-DOS compatible computers. I am firmly of the opinion that the Macintosh is Catholic and that DOS is Protestant. Indeed, the Macintosh is counterreformist and has been influenced by the “ratio studiorum” of the Jesuits. It is cheerful, friendly, conciliatory, it tells the faithful how they must proceed step by step to reach – if not the Kingdom of Heaven – the moment in which their document is printed. It is catechistic: the essence of revelation is dealt with via simple formulae and sumptuous icons. Everyone has a right to salvation.
DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can reach salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: a long way from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment.
You may object that, with the passage to Windows, the DOS universe has come to resemble more closely the counterreformist tolerance of the Macintosh. It's true: Windows represents an Anglican-style schism, big ceremonies in the cathedral, but there is always the possibility of a return to DOS to change things in accordance with bizarre decisions.....
And machine code, which lies beneath both systems (or environments, if you prefer)? Ah, that is to do with the Old Testament, and is Talmudic and cabalistic.
The excerpt is from an English translation of Umberto Eco's back-page column, "La bustina di Minerva," in the Italian newsweekly Espresso (September 30, 1994).
I didn't make a record of where I originally saw this, but I put this on my web site a long time ago, near when I first had one, as I had been living in Italy and was aware of Eco. I didn't translate it myself, just copied it from somewhere else on the Net, because it appealed to me.
Personally, I'm a Quaker, which in my mind integrates some of the best things of both catholic and protestant Christianity (and relates to other religions as well).
This is the page cited by Stephen Fry in the Guardian on Saturday October 27, 2007.
Found 2021-09-20 at agonia.net, translation dated 2005-05-29, by Maria Lacargia. I imagine that this could have been the source of the translation that then spread in English. It's a good translation, in my opinion!
Friends, Italians, countrymen, I ask that a Committee for Public Health be set up, whose task would be to censor (by violent means, if necessary) discussion of the following topics in the Italian press. Each censored topic is followed by an alternative in brackets which is just as futile, but rich with the potential for polemic. Whether Joyce is boring (whether reading Thomas Mann gives one erections). Whether Heidegger is responsible for the crisis of the Left (whether Ariosto provoked the revocation of the Edict of Nantes). Whether semiotics has blurred the difference between Walt Disney and Dante (whether De Agostini does the right thing in putting Vimercate and the Sahara in the same atlas). Whether Italy boycotted quantum physics (whether France plots against the subjunctive). Whether new technologies kill books and cinemas (whether zeppelins made bicycles redundant). Whether computers kill inspiration (whether fountain pens are Protestant).
One can continue with: whether Moses was anti-semitic; whether Leon Bloy liked Calasso; whether Rousseau was responsible for the atomic bomb; whether Homer approved of investments in Treasury stocks; whether the Sacred Heart is monarchist or republican.
I asked above whether fountain pens were Protestant. Insufficient consideration has been given to the new underground religious war which is modifying the modern world. It's an old idea of mine, but I find that whenever I tell people about it they immediately agree with me.
The fact is that the world is divided between users of the Macintosh computer and users of MS-DOS compatible computers. I am firmly of the opinion that the Macintosh is Catholic and that DOS is Protestant. Indeed, the Macintosh is counter-reformist and has been influenced by the ratio studiorum of the Jesuits. It is cheerful, friendly, conciliatory; it tells the faithful how they must proceed step by step to reach – if not the kingdom of Heaven – the moment in which their document is printed. It is catechistic: The essence of revelation is dealt with via simple formulae and sumptuous icons. Everyone has a right to salvation.
DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can achieve salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: Far away from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment.
You may object that, with the passage to Windows, the DOS universe has come to resemble more closely the counter-reformist tolerance of the Macintosh. It's true: Windows represents an Anglican-style schism, big ceremonies in the cathedral, but there is always the possibility of a return to DOS to change things in accordance with bizarre decisions: When it comes down to it, you can decide to ordain women and gays if you want to.
Naturally, the Catholicism and Protestantism of the two systems have nothing to do with the cultural and religious positions of their users. One may wonder whether, as time goes by, the use of one system rather than another leads to profound inner changes. Can you use DOS and be a Vande supporter? And more: Would Celine have written using Word, WordPerfect, or Wordstar? Would Descartes have programmed in Pascal?
And machine code, which lies beneath and decides the destiny of both systems (or environments, if you prefer)? Ah, that belongs to the Old Testament, and is talmudic and cabalistic. The Jewish lobby, as always....
Found 2021-09-20 at cyberteologia.it, post dated 2011.
Non si è mai riflettuto abbastanza sulla nuova lotta di religione che sta sotterraneamente modificando il mondo contemporaneo.
Il fatto è che ormai il mondo si divide tra utenti del computer Macintosh e utenti dei computer compatibili col sistema operativo Ms-Dos. È mia profonda persuasione che il Macintosh sia cattolico e il Dos protestante. Anzi, il Macintosh è cattolico controriformista, e risente della “ratio studiorum” dei gesuiti. È festoso, amichevole, conciliante, dice al fedele come deve procedere passo per passo per raggiungere – se non il regno dei cieli – il momento della stampa finale del documento. È catechistico, l’essenza della rivelazione è risolta in formule compensibili e in icone sontuose. Tutti hanno diritto alla salvezza.
Il Dos è protestante, addirittura calvinista. Prevede una libera interpretazione delle scritture, chiede decisioni personali e sofferte, impone una ermeneutica sottile, dà per scontato che la salvezza non è alla portata di tutti. Per far funzionare il sistema si richiedono atti personali di interpretazione del programma: lontano dalla comunità barocca dei festanti, l’utente è chiuso nella solitudine del proprio rovello interiore.
Si si obbietterà che, col passaggio a Windows, l’universo Dos si è avvicinato alla tolleranza controriformistica del Macintosh. È vero: Windows rappresenta uno scisma di tipo anglicano, grandi cerimoni nella cattedrale, ma possibilità di subitanei ritorni al Dos per modificare un sacco di cose in base a bizzarre decisioni: in fin dei conti si può conferire il sacerdozio anche alle donne e ai gay.
Naturalmente cattolicesimo e protestantesimo dei due sistemi non hanno nulla a che fare con le posizioni culturali e religiose degli utenti. Ho scoperto un giorno che il severo e tormentato Fortini usa il Macintosh, cose da non credere. Però c’è da chiedersi se alla lontana, con il tempo e con le nespole, l’uso di un sistema piuttosto che l’altro non porti anche a profonde modificazioni interiori. Davvero si può usare il Dos e tifare per la Vandea? E inoltre: Céline avrebbe scritto con Word, Word Perfect o Wordstar? Cartesio avrebbe programmato in Pascal?
È il linguaggio macchina, che decide al di sotto del destino di entrambi i sistemi o ambienti che dir si voglia? Eh, quello è veterotestamentario, talmudico e cabalistico. Ahi, sempre la lobby ebraica…
Found 2021-09-20, among other places, at tecalibri.info, along with the rest of the Italian, as above.
Questa Bustina è di sei anni fa. Nel frattempo le cose sono cambiate. I vari releases hanno portato Windows 95 e 98 a diventare decisamente cattolico-tridentini, insieme a Mac. La fiaccola del protestantesimo è passata nelle mani di Linux. Ma l'opposizione rimane valida.