> Various people have been discussing whether or not various races
> are descended from the Man Rune and/or Grandfather Mortal.
> I think that at least some of the confusion stems from equating
> GFM with the Man Rune. This is a mistake I believe, while most
> races regard Grandfather Mortal as being linked to the man rune
> I do not think that the two concepts are equivalent. One example
> is the worship of Grandfather Baboon which has no connection with
> the Man Rune at all.
>
> The second problem is that the Rune are a God Learner construct,
> rather than a fundamental truth. Sure they are a useful construct
> that helps to describe the world but as they are not a fundamental
> truth they are bound to break down at some stage. Thus it is unsafe
> to wholey rely on them.
I remember it as the God Learners didn't *CREATE* the runes, so much as
systematize them, and blur over the minor variations (such as the difference
between the Humakti and Yanafil Tarnils Death runes). They did the same for
Philosophical Entities such as Grandfather Mortal. Grandfather Baboon is the
Baboon version of the usual fellow, but either the Baboons resisted the
GL combination, the GLs ignored it as beneath their notice (being Westerns,
they were also human chauvinists), or it has rediverged since the fall
of the GL empires.
In any case, using either as *proof* is a mistake, like using the length
of a light-year to calculate the speed of light. The arguments are
ultimately circular in both cases.