> OK I thought a bit more about what the problem that I have with
> this is, exactly. It is that moral relativism at a personal and a
> metaphysical level both exist within glorantha.
Which is a problem because? Given that many mythologies exist in glorantha, some degree of relativisim is necessary. How else would one resolve the question of whether Lunars are good or bad?
> Firstly, we know that institutions - perhaps more so in the case of
> the empire, who knows - can behave in manners we think of as
> hypocritical.
The issue of whether we think their behaviour is hypocritical is neither here or there. They have their own moral codes which validates their behaviour. It is still possible for a gloranthan to be hypocritical but they can only be judged so on the basis of their moral code.
For example: an Orlanthi claims to uphold justice while performing an act of violence that further inflames a feud. Is he hyprocritical? No. He is acting in an Orlanthi manner (creating a just situation through an act of violence is what Orlanth did to Yelm).
> So, knowing the myth of an institution or devotee does
> not necessarily tell you that much about their behaviour,
> although it does inform your ballpark.
I fail to see why myths should never be used to infer real behaviour to avoid us arriving at a erroneous conclusion, on the grounds that hypocrisy can exist in glorantha.
> Secondly, we know that gods change, die, get replaced, co-opted,
> corrupted, that people rewrite myths through heroquesting etc etc,
> and thus it comes about that there are so many Arkats and Gbaji's
> variations of other shared deities. So it is not even the case
> that there is one moral or precedural truth which necessarily
> remains consistent or persistent with any given god.
So? The many moral or procedural truths are still valid. If another Orlanthi people thought of the Orventili myth as involving a blanket that was used to bind the two sides together, then they would use blankets rather than rugs to bring peace.
> If neither the gods nor their worshippers are constant, if both are
> subject to variation and foible, what reason exactly do we have to
> assume that because peacemakers throw blankets over swords in myth
> they do so in reality?
Because Orventili the Peacemaker is a living goddess whose rug of peace is a real magic. The Ernaldans remember the myth because it works - if it did not, they would have no need to remember it and the myth would exist only in the dusty tomes of some sage.
> Knowing the content of myth does not,
> apparently, grant the ability to predict actual behaviour.
What do you think gloranthans remember myths _for_?
> Knowing
> the myth tells you only what the people who believe the myth
> thought peacemakers did in myth; that does not necessarily
> suggest that they also believe that is an appropriate behaviour
> in the real world with real swords and blankets.
Garreth, the women are not throwing real blankets over real swords to bring peace, they are invoking the Orventili magic to attempt to bring peace.
--Peter Metcalfe
Powered by hypermail