> You claim that your posts on the differences between men and animals
> in the real world is pertinent to Glorantha, since it actually helps
> us understand Glorantha.
Reflecting on the differences between men and animals (real differences, perceived differences, anthropological vs. zoological theories, and - most importantly - Myths), is of help when devising Hsunchen cultures, non-human ones, when including animal totemism in the game, perhaps to help designing an intelligent animal NPC, gauging the mental effects of gaining some sort of animal power, and other such possibilities. It also serves as deep research into the nature of Glorantha (as divergent from RW), a time-honoured purpose for this mailing list, like it or not (and many DON'T).
> I admit that it is possible that you are right, and that I am simply
> unable too see the relevance. I doubt it, but it is possible.
The main thrust of my posts was to disagree with Gregs "Fire only" suggestion, and explaining why I disagree. As negative statements, it is of course (logically) impossible that the posts be _directly_ useful to increase our understanding of Glorantha (in any but the most abstract way), except that it appears that the idea that the difference between "men" and "animals" might be "Fire" is only marginally pertinent to Glorantha, as the current discussion seems to show, and that it is therefore (marginally) useful to put Greg's suggestion in proper perspective .
Comments on the differences between animal minds and person minds are useful only as deep Glorantha research, as (I hope) helping define a basis for Gloranthan Animal Myths that we (as RW humans) can relate to, & not gloss over using our own particular a priori judgements.
> Therefore, can you please give a concrete example where you actually
> relate your previous discussion on this topic to Glorantha? I would be
> genuinely interested.
You want me to come up with a concrete example based on negative information (the difference between men and animals * isn't * "fire only") ? It cannot be done. It would be like asking for a concrete example where the statement, "Mickey Mouse isn't the President of the United States", could be related to discussions about the Real World.
Peter, this might not be your cup of tea : if not, just ignore it, and it'll go away. Asking for further explanations about purportedly OT topics isn't the best method for maintaining Gloranthan topicness purity on the GD. IMHO. cheers,
Julian Lord
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail