> > The existance of Yelm, Elmal and Kargzant giving differing
> > answers is not sufficient?
> This can only be true if you make the assumption that this reality is
Erm ; no. There are in fact several ways that statements of truth can be mutually incompatible even within an objective reality.
Ob-Glorantha, one could posit the various regions of the Other Side (from a purely objective, non-transcendent, dimensionally complex POV) as being shaped by the belief structures of the faithful (much in the same way that meta-circuits are imprinted within a brain).
In the same way that two regions of the brain can hold two mutually contradictory facts, three different worshippers can have radically different beliefs which can all be true, from the observation of three different areas of the Other Side : each one objectively real.
A pretty crass way of looking at the literary meaning of Glorantha, but a valid one nevertheless.
Glorantha is literature ; not a description of any kind of reality. And the purpose of this literature is to induce pleasurable dreams and fantasies which, by necessity, are incompatible with 'the' scientific method of reason.
That Glorantha can produce seemingly incompatible fantasies and dreams (in other words YGMV) is hardly a weakness, but a great strength, and a testimony to the power of its design.
Glorantha, as a reality, IS 100% subjective.
> I'm challenging that assumption, so this issue isn't really
Yes it is. You are confusing science and literature. Bad idea.
> Either Chaos is inherently evil or it isn't.
I'm sorry, but this is a *completely* subjective proposal.
'Evil' is a value judgement, and doesn't belong to the vocabulary of *any* version of objectivism.
> > Variations in expressing the same basic idea, more likely.
> Some people on the list say that Humakti heroquesting to the Underworld
> is a one-way trip. This contradicts what you say above. Hardly a simple
But a variation nonetheless. The two distinct suggestions :
are variations of the Journey to the Underworld story of Humakt's mythology.
They are complementary.
Carl Fink :
> I object to the idea of INERADICABLE contradictions, because,
> as I said, they make things implausible.
Well that's OK then ; every single contradiction in Glorantha is *perfectly* eradicable ... ;-)
> "What if an Orlanthi Storm Voice, a Yelmic nobleman, and a
> Malkioni Wizard all flew into the SkyRealm together and
> looked at the Sun?"
Three blind mice ?
> The idea that it doesn't have to obey Aristotle's Law of Contradictions
> is just *weird* to me.
Literature need obey no such law.
Powered by hypermail