> What would it take to make a suggestion not sound like crypto-theism?
>
Theism, in the text, is about something that you are - I would probably
characterise it as something that you are that resembles something that an
immortal is. It's about that emulation of immortals so it's more like
something that you *do.*
**
I am attempting to imagine how a given person's Rune might influence their
magic if they are not participating in theistic magical practices. Allowing
Spiritists to obey a set of personal taboos in order to obtain some sense of
self-identification with a greater power seems very similar to the theistic
approach.
[It may be that the Runes are only of use in the theistic approach (this could be The Point, as it were) but I don't particularly like this idea. If the Runes as magical concepts are important to Glorantha, then the personal Runes of a given person should probably be important in some magical way.]
> > Essentialists (I am sick of writing "wizard")
>
> I've started using Sophists myself (based on wisdom and intended to form
> a parallel with rationalism etc) although the related words for the
> magic (sophistry? sophisticated magic?) don't work so well.
>
I think it is quite good for that educated scholarly 'wizardly' sort of person; however I am at a bit of a loss as to how to describe the class of lay people. We can say "theist" or "animist"/"spiritist" but saying "wizard" and using it to refer to a soldier who knows marching songs, or a martial member of a military order, or a peasant who attends regular rites and gains Fertile Fields Blessings seems weird to me.
--
John Machin
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
- Athanasius Kircher, 'The Great Art of Knowledge'.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Powered by hypermail