Included middle.

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:01:13 GMT


darvall writes, on Mrs. Eel's alleged excesses:

> That it is not debauchery but worship. Having had to recently weigh in on a
> "its not pornography its art" debate I concede the boundaries do blur but
> for a Ulerian they are probably very clear.

You don't have to be an Illuminate to spot that in both the above cases, there's little reason something can't be both, though in debates of either kind, no-one is 'strongly incentivised' to take such a position. (Both sides pause to pelt the smart-arse in the middle of the two camps.)

> Alex raises another point from my floundering subconcious
> >"Hey, Humakt the Champion wouldn't do a thinglike that!" "True, but then
> >I'm >Eurmal the Murderer" *splat*
>
> How many deities have this sort of thing happenning? I.E. to what extent
> are there potential "best fits" that can be slotted into HQs in the absence
> of the 'correct' deity. Some Orlanth aspects clearly fill this role but
> could the above example be mythicly (or HQily) usable?

One would need more context than my highly flip comment bothered to admit; I think the short answer is "possibly in some circumstances".

Cheers,
Alex.


Powered by hypermail