Re: Runes for non-theists [was: 'Three Runes']

From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_d-4iF4ctlnNB40B6AXJoUSs4AhwDaeVk28Z53Yj6wAEtYNzgFe-SuUWA7PCMXxoJU8->
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 18:23:10 +1300


John Machin wrote:
> 2009/12/22 Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_rlBVd6-TDANiaHlSCcA-0709mgyJvk_jKPZOqMmaqriSYtR6N91ZYYeKlUv7VfCZopbBGGMVju-ICez19dRaSyL-qg.yahoo.invalid>
>

>> What would it take to make a suggestion not sound like crypto-theism?

> Theism, in the text, is about something that you are

The actual statement is "an affinity is something you are". Given that the Westerners worship Saints, the Praxians worship Waha and Eiritha and practically every other animist follows a Really Big Spirit of some sort, to characterise the emulation of immortals as the sin qua non of theism is at odds with what we know about glorantha.

> 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.

So how do you think a Praxian should follow Waha given that they have had Khans/Rune Lords of Waha and the like for over twenty years?

--Peter Metcalfe            

Powered by hypermail