So it's science that happens to involve a computer? Maybe I misunderstood what CS truly is. I thought it was the science of computing. And while I used a lot of books and paper to study it, without the machines it would not have been of much use.
It is the Science of Computing. Memory Management is a great example of this. You learn the theory behind memory management, physical vs virtual memory, pages, swapping, with the goal of being able to understand how modern computing handles memory. And down at that level, it's all theory and math. You don't actually need to use a computer to understand it. Something like sorting lists at an algorithmic level can be applied without a computer. Part of CS is understanding the most efficient way to sort or traverse a data structure- a computer isn't needed to apply it.
It's like Medicine. You can know how the human body works down to a cellular level without ever touching another human. It's not very useful without another human to apply it to, but the science and application of that science can be two distinct topics.
While technically true my experience is that doing makes learning easier. Whether it's chemistry labs or running modified examples through a computer the process helps things click for me.
The full quote reads "Computer science is not about machines, in the same way that astronomy is not about telescopes. There is an essential unity of mathematics and computer science" and is disputatively attributed to Mike Fellows and Dijkstra although Fellows also indicates Dijkstra said it in a '93 publication.