Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-29-2009 @ 6:52PM
Serrenity said...
I think the majority of people completely missed the point (including Mr. Schramm)
First off, it's not his definition of religion - it's a widely accepted definition of religion within academics. I think it's important to note that he's not pushing the idea of WoW as a religion but rather as a context in which to look at something.
There's a difference between saying something "is a religion" and something "can be viewed as a religion." The latter does not necessitate the former. Based on Schramm's brief synopsis here, he has a fairly decent case of view WoW *as a religion* not that WoW is a religion.
No need to reiterate what was side in the blog post, but there are numerous instances to support what he was saying. It shows strong analytical thinking and being able to abstract outside the box.
Calling him stupid and a moron does nothing but show your own intellectual shortcomings.
Reply