Re: Adept's questions on chaos

From: donald_at_a18Qvi5PGsZsbrac_XVf9y6sktlcn6L_n1U2bvnPiHR8q962epHIh5cPQCCSL07bAL0EC
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:16:01 GMT


In message <20070418222255.21784.qmail_at_Og_ieFbbGfHfQ1APOezxN0v1fBlBB-PGMHgnDd44tS1CJO45vMGr5fcWzUnHYPRpz2SzuxRTtGjp2XudT-vvCrQ4DiAgrwN92DDdlg2qhMGLJfg.yahoo.invalid> Peter Metcalfe writes:
>At 12:32 a.m. 19/04/2007, you wrote:
>>In message <20070418031739.21507.qmail_at_VMBg8YjE4_uwkaQ5P8DUAVD7YwiHBkeMCuXA56eTDM4SRfcC0rxOsN0eVe06OPVQjVu7ShhoGiQPHEM1x5RkOFBvee6XqJ6rz_QS3DMa-lWPOdcRig.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.

Doctors in the RW have a clear definition of cancer which, with training, anyone can apply. If we, or more importantly Gloranthans, haven't a definition of what a chaos feature is then that isn't an objective test for chaos. And I'm pretty sure there isn't even general argreement among different societies as to what chaos is.

>>Nor does this address the issue of how and why chaos spreads.
>
>Except that this issue has been addressed in the Cults of
>Terror.

Which is of course a completely objective document, like everything else published about Glorantha.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

           

Powered by hypermail