Re: HPG BunWars : the RPG !!

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 03:23:08 +0100 (BST)

Julian Lord and I:
> > I'm a bit clearer about what you seem to be suggesting (I think!) but
> > no more convinced thereby. If the transcendent "world" were actually
> > something different, what, pray tell, would characterise it?
>
> Sorry, but the question is nonsensical. Transcendence is actually the reverse
of
> characterisation or differences, which is a bit mind-boggling really.

I didn't ask you to characterise the transcendent; I asked you to characterise the world that everyone else seems happy enough with the proposition that it's transcendent (since its transcendence is, specifically, what sets it apart from the "Otherworlds" per se), but that _you_ explicitly suggested might be regarded as immanent.

If we're now in the position that you're still asserting that it is, or that it may be, not transcendent, but that's it's impossible to characterise how this might be so, then while I wouldn't go so far as to say it was nonsensical, then the word "pointless" would certainly spring to mind...

> > To approach the transcendent world requires a quite different order
> > of change in one's self than any of the others.
>
> No, because to enter (or even contact) *any* otherworld is a transcendental
power.

That's not true or useful in any substantiative sense.

---