At 12:32 a.m. 19/04/2007, you wrote:
>In message <20070418031739.21507.qmail_at_VjU2BZ-536GcJY3oq5pHYIlfoIvIiVuUWsTK8UULxDVGPxw8KUVsYvCmB25dhTLqbmpz8nL-15-Rii_JNvnypKR_TUDO12EvAmiEyAey9u5KTlFOag.yahoo.invalid> Peter
>Metcalfe writes:
> >At 01:41 a.m. 18/04/2007, you wrote:
> >
> >>I don't think we have an objective explanation of chaos in
> >>Glorantha.
> >
> >Having a chaotic feature is pretty much an objective
> >test of being a chaotic.
>
>Certainly. However not all chaotic beings have chaotic features
>and what is a chaotic feature? A tentacle instead of an arm is
>clear enough, but how about an extra finger?
Saying that the borders are blurred does not imply there
is no objective test for chaos in glorantha. By the same
reasoning, one could argue that because some cancers
are hard to detect, cancer is not an objective concept.
>Nor does this address the issue of how and why chaos spreads.
Except that this issue has been addressed in the Cults of
Terror.
--Peter Metcalfe