How does it not? I asked you what the objective nature of the sun was, and you quite clearly said "Yelm". Thus, given the original context of this whole debate, about how mutually "contradictory" "truths" about (say) the sun can (or must not) be simultaneously valid, surely the whole point of knowing which of them is "objectively" true is that in case of disagreement, we know who is correct? If this _isn't_ so, how can you claim that Yelm is objectively the true nature of the sun?
> [The above is tought out while wearing my orlanthi hat, I admit. And a
> Vormaini, questing to see the sungod would not call him Yelm or Elmal. But
> the basic powers of their sungod would still be light and heat, since that
> is part of the core reality of the sun.]
That the sun is associated with light and heat would be in the "bleedin' obvious" category. Whether the Vorumai have a sun god, much less what sort, isn't.
This is becoming frustratingly circular, not least because the people who most want an "objective Glorantha" seem not merely not to have no better a handle on it than the rest of us, and come to that, aren't to my mind being at all clear about what it is that they want, even in principle.
Powered by hypermail