{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5099", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 5099, "subject": "What's So Great About Ushas", "messages": 35, "voices": 11, "first": "2008-07-11T14:01:00+00:00", "last": "2008-07-19T14:28:03+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T14:01:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If I understand Paul B correctly, he interprets BotNS without any sense of religious allegory.\nPerhaps Wolfe isn't even trying to address the Problem Of Evil? It is just a cool tale about a \ngothic hero and some weird aliens in robes and their winged, hermaprhodite leader?\n\nI couild be wrong, but I think that view is missing something. The bad guys have the names of\npre-Christian monsters and the leader of the good guys has the name of an archangel. If there \nis no religion here, why not just name them Zork and Urg and Fred?\n\n I think Jeff Wilson asks a key question:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Would you agree that it can be good for the Increate to do something \nthat it would be evil to be done by a man?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It seems to me Wolfe is giving an affirmative answer to that question. For some reason this analogy \npopped into my head- an adult chances upon a small child who found a nest of new born mice\nin a field and is smushing them with a rock. The adult might tell the child that the action is wrong and \ncruel yet he/she uses a mousetrap in his/her home. Isn't the adult, with greater powers of\nperception of the future and of consequences, a superior moral agent to the child? I think the child\nwould tend to think his/her field mouse smashing is morally equivalent to a mousetrap in a home while\nthe adult (though not all adults) recognizes a difference. \n\nSimilarly, wouldn't aliens or angels with superior perceptive powers be superior moral agents to humans? \nThe hierogrammates are described as far away from the Increate but still far closer to Him than humans.\n \"Yours are a race of pawns\" says Tzadkiel, meaning able to move only forward in time, usually one step \nat a time. It would seem the Hierogrammates can move forward, backward, sideways and diagonally in \nspace and time and thus clearly have a superior understanding of consequences to humans and are thus\nsuperior moral agents (in Wolfe's view). \n\nAdditionally, Tzadkiel is unwilling to take genocidal action without consent by a representative of the people.\nTzadkiel has the power and moral authority to do it without consent, so why does he/she feel the need for it? \nI think Wolfe adds this to reinforce the moral superiority of Hierogrammates and the Increate (and by allegory \nthe superiority of God and angels in our world who have done some very destructive things) by adding the very \nhuman moral component of consent that almost all of us readers can agree is right.\n\nI can see how cynical atheists might have a different interpretation. The consent Tzadkiel wants is just lip service. \nTzadkiel and his ilk had all the time in the world (er..universe..er....universes) to wait for a consent. Any human \nrepresentative could seek audience with them but if they didn't give the right answer, they were sent home, with \ntheir balls cut off for their trouble. It seems to me (being something of an atheist myself) to be a reasonable\nargument.\n\nBut I don't think that view was Wolfe's intention. Severian seems imperfect yet still brave and heroic, a guy who is \n(almost) always trying to do the right thing. I think Severian is clearly Wolfe's literary avatar and I doubt this \ntranscendent story could have been written by a guy who feels he is a dupe, someone who has spent his life \nworshipping a false, deceptive, immoral God.\n\n(dupe to a kind, caring loving God? yeah, Wolfe might feel that way, like a child who sees through his father's attempts\nto trick him into doing the right thing)\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807110849p7e143749ne8487e847665b181@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T15:49:33+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The trouble with what Jeff says, and with what you're saying here, is\ngranting the aliens higher moral freedom based on the assumption that they\nare closer to God (smarter, more flexible, even a little omnipresent) and\ntherefore should get more exceptions.\n\nIt's not God that destroys Urth. Is there actual evidence that the aliens\nare even doing the will of God, or at least trying to? That would solve a\nsubstantial part of the problem. At the moment though, the only reason I\nrecall is the need to have the humans become the Hieros so they can again\ncreate the Hierogrammates. Perhaps I've simply not been paying attention,\nbut I actually can't find where God enters into that particular plotline.\n\nHowever, granting them exceptions simply because they know more, or are more\npowerful, is silly. There are more and less powerful and wise humans too,\nbut suggesting that one can get away with murder (for a good cause, trust\nme!) isn't something most can stomach.\n\nFar be it from me to advocate a materialist reading of BotNS, I am simply\nadvocating the evaluation of the spirituality of its characters.\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:01 AM, b sharp wrote:\n\n\nIf I understand Paul B correctly, he interprets BotNS without any sense of\nreligious allegory.\nPerhaps Wolfe isn't even trying to address the Problem Of Evil? It is just\na cool tale about a\ngothic hero and some weird aliens in robes and their winged, hermaprhodite\nleader?\n\nI couild be wrong, but I think that view is missing something. The bad\nguys have the names of\npre-Christian monsters and the leader of the good guys has the name of an\narchangel. If there\nis no religion here, why not just name them Zork and Urg and Fred?\n\n I think Jeff Wilson asks a key question:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Would you agree that it can be good for the Increate to do something\nthat it would be evil to be done by a man?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It seems to me Wolfe is giving an affirmative answer to that question. For\nsome reason this analogy\npopped into my head- an adult chances upon a small child who found a nest\nof new born mice\nin a field and is smushing them with a rock. The adult might tell the child\nthat the action is wrong and\ncruel yet he/she uses a mousetrap in his/her home. Isn't the adult, with\ngreater powers of\nperception of the future and of consequences, a superior moral agent to the\nchild? I think the child\nwould tend to think his/her field mouse smashing is morally equivalent to\n a mousetrap in a home while\nthe adult (though not all adults) recognizes a difference.\n\nSimilarly, wouldn't aliens or angels with superior perceptive powers be\nsuperior moral agents to humans?\nThe hierogrammates are described as far away from the Increate but still\nfar closer to Him than humans.\n \"Yours are a race of pawns\" says Tzadkiel, meaning able to move only\nforward in time, usually one step\nat a time. It would seem the Hierogrammates can move forward, backward,\nsideways and diagonally in\nspace and time and thus clearly have a superior understanding of\nconsequences to humans and are thus\nsuperior moral agents (in Wolfe's view).\n\nAdditionally, Tzadkiel is unwilling to take genocidal action without\nconsent by a representative of the people.\nTzadkiel has the power and moral authority to do it without consent, so why\ndoes he/she feel the need for it?\nI think Wolfe adds this to reinforce the moral superiority of\nHierogrammates and the Increate (and by allegory\nthe superiority of God and angels in our world who have done some very\ndestructive things) by adding the very\nhuman moral component of consent that almost all of us readers can agree is\nright.\n\nI can see how cynical atheists might have a different interpretation. The\nconsent Tzadkiel wants is just lip service.\nTzadkiel and his ilk had all the time in the world\n(er..universe..er....universes) to wait for a consent. Any human\nrepresentative could seek audience with them but if they didn't give the\nright answer, they were sent home, with\ntheir balls cut off for their trouble. It seems to me (being something of\nan atheist myself) to be a reasonable\nargument.\n\nBut I don't think that view was Wolfe's intention. Severian seems\nimperfect yet still brave and heroic, a guy who is\n(almost) always trying to do the right thing. I think Severian is clearly\nWolfe's literary avatar and I doubt this\ntranscendent story could have been written by a guy who feels he is a dupe,\nsomeone who has spent his life\nworshipping a false, deceptive, immoral God.\n\n(dupe to a kind, caring loving God? yeah, Wolfe might feel that way, like a\nchild who sees through his father's attempts\nto trick him into doing the right thing)\n\n-bsharp\n_________________________________________________________________\nNeed to know now? Get instant answers with Windows Live Messenger.\n\nhttp://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger_072008\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4877A7BF.6060706@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T18:34:39+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<3e1fa2e90807110849p7e143749ne8487e847665b181@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Paul B wrote:\nThe trouble with what Jeff says, and with what you're saying here, is \ngranting the aliens higher moral freedom based on the assumption that \nthey are closer to God (smarter, more flexible, even a little \nomnipresent) and therefore should get more exceptions. \n\nIt's not God that destroys Urth. Is there actual evidence that the \naliens are even doing the will of God, or at least trying to? That \nwould solve a substantial part of the problem. At the moment though, \nthe only reason I recall is the need to have the humans become the \nHieros so they can again create the Hierogrammates. Perhaps I've simply \nnot been paying attention, but I actually can't find where God enters \ninto that particular plotline." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That was pretty much the discussion in progress just before you arrived. \nI'm not convinced that God has no part in a plan involving the White \nFountain; as the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe, He is \nresponsible for its content and as such He kills everyone and destroys \neverything that passeth away. How he implements His will and whether the \nintermediaries are servants, sock puppets, or dupes is what we are \nsorting out." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T18:46:21+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<4877A7BF.6060706@io.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Paul B I do think you are missing numerous hints that the Hiero-types are (as mentioned in my\nprevious post) more omniscient and closer to the Increate in purpose than humans (and you \nshouldn't have tried to weaken my position by adding your own thought about power creating \nmoral superiority ;-), I mentioned knowledge and foresight only).\n\nIn more general terms, it seems to me you are stubbornly clinging to a fallacy: that you are the\nequal in ability to make moral judgements to omniscient beings who can directly observe the future.\nYou are not their equal. You and all of us other humans can only guess what the consequence of an\n action will be and make decisions based on judgement of statistical liklihood. I hope you are not trying\nto argue that a moral judgement can be made completely independent from the consequences of actions\n(making your moral framework very Beavisian in that cool stuff rocks and bogus stuff sucks).\n\nA room full of 4 year olds might get together and decide they should be provided with loaded automatic \nweapons to scare away monsters. A philosopher child among them might argue that adults are bigger \nbut possess no particular features that make them superior moral agents and the right thing to do would\nbe to provide them with the monster protections they need. Paul, in the presence of God or Tzadkiel you \nare this child. As a human being, you (and I) just don't know enough to judge the actions of God and \nangels. And I suspect you won't be getting your guns (unless perhaps you share your daycare with baby\nAdolph? j/k j/k).\n\nYou might see the merit of this view in which an absolute certainty about the future is a tool which confers \nmoral superiority or perhaps not (but please no more lectures about utilitarianism which is a merely human \nprinciple based on statistical liklihood of outcome.\n\nBut you might argue that you are the equal of any intelligence in making moral judgements about the past \nwhere outcomes are set. If we pretend that reading history is equivalent to directly observing the past it \nmight seem that when we humans observe the past we can see with certainty the full consequences of an \naction.\n\nHowever this also is false because, unlike Tzadkiel, we cannot see multiple threads and multiple outcomes \nbased on many possible choices of action. We can only know what one choice was made, see the outcome\nof that choice and only guess whether that outcome would have been better or worse than if other choices\nwere made. God can see all possible choices and all possible outcomes making Him the perfect moral agent.\nTzadkiel's ability approaches this making him/her far, far more morally advanced than an adult is to a child. \nThus our own moral judgement of Tzadkiel's or God's actions is of negligible importance.\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370807111154m6be8a48qbae63dc80f56adac@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T18:54:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<4877A7BF.6060706@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nThat was pretty much the discussion in progress just before you arrived. I'm\nnot convinced that God has no part in a plan involving the White Fountain;\nas the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe, He is responsible for\nits content and as such He kills everyone and destroys everything that\npasseth away. How he implements His will and whether the intermediaries are\nservants, sock puppets, or dupes is what we are sorting out." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, there's a further point here: one can claim that *any* action, by\n*anyone*, is part of God's Plan. To do this is to create moral anarchy\nfor humans -- \"Yes, I killed six million Jews, but that was part of God's\nplan, so it's okay.\" No, I don't think so; the only way to theodicize this is\nby assuming an extreme Calvinist-predestinarian stance.\n\nThe only way to say that the Hiero*s don't share the same moral\nburden as humans is to say that they have direct knowledge of\nGod's will. This is the justification for the Israelites' slaughter of the\nnatives of Canaan -- \"God said so,\" which trumped \"Thou shalt\nnot murder.\"\n\nSo to justify the Hiero*s' actions, to say that their plan that involved\nthe slaughter of Urth's billions, was morally OK, means that you have\nto present evidence that they have a direct knowledge of the will\nof the Increate, which I do not see in the text." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\n\nI once absend-mindedly ordered Three Mile Island dressing in a\nrestaurant and, with great presence of mind, they brought Thousand\nIsland Dressing and a bottle of chili sauce. -- T. Pratchett" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807111203v12cd055dg2d12cbd824ef1d55@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T19:03:59+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Utilitarianism, which I defined rather than lectured about, is crucial to\nthis despite what you may say. You base the argument for foreknowledge\ngiving moral exemption on the assumption that since the immoral action will\nresult in greater good, it is in fact moral. This is again a definition of\nutilitarianism.\n\nSince we've come to silly examples, let me give you one as well then, it's\nso time-worn it's practically polished. You're a surgeon who can harvest\nthe organs of a single worthless hobo to save the lives of great men, and\nyou know this will work (you're a GOOD surgeon). Is your doing this moral?\nLike a fancy Hierogrammate, you have foresight in this one case, and killing\nthis hobo will in fact produce greater good.\n\nDoes your foreknowledge give you the moral justification for murder?\n\nA utilitarian, incidentally, would agree. This is why utilitarianism\nmatters.\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:46 PM, b sharp wrote:\n\nPaul B I do think you are missing numerous hints that the Hiero-types are\n(as mentioned in my\nprevious post) more omniscient and closer to the Increate in purpose than\nhumans (and you\nshouldn't have tried to weaken my position by adding your own thought about\npower creating\nmoral superiority ;-), I mentioned knowledge and foresight only).\n\nIn more general terms, it seems to me you are stubbornly clinging to a\nfallacy: that you are the\nequal in ability to make moral judgements to omniscient beings who can\ndirectly observe the future.\nYou are not their equal. You and all of us other humans can only guess\nwhat the consequence of an\n action will be and make decisions based on judgement of statistical\nliklihood. I hope you are not trying\nto argue that a moral judgement can be made completely independent from the\nconsequences of actions\n(making your moral framework very Beavisian in that cool stuff rocks and\nbogus stuff sucks).\n\nA room full of 4 year olds might get together and decide they should be\nprovided with loaded automatic\nweapons to scare away monsters. A philosopher child among them might argue\nthat adults are bigger\nbut possess no particular features that make them superior moral agents and\nthe right thing to do would\nbe to provide them with the monster protections they need. Paul, in the\npresence of God or Tzadkiel you\nare this child. As a human being, you (and I) just don't know enough to\njudge the actions of God and\nangels. And I suspect you won't be getting your guns (unless perhaps you\nshare your daycare with baby\nAdolph? j/k j/k).\n\nYou might see the merit of this view in which an absolute certainty about\nthe future is a tool which confers\nmoral superiority or perhaps not (but please no more lectures about\nutilitarianism which is a merely human\nprinciple based on statistical liklihood of outcome.\n\nBut you might argue that you are the equal of any intelligence in making\nmoral judgements about the past\nwhere outcomes are set. If we pretend that reading history is equivalent to\ndirectly observing the past it\nmight seem that when we humans observe the past we can see with certainty\nthe full consequences of an\naction.\n\nHowever this also is false because, unlike Tzadkiel, we cannot see multiple\nthreads and multiple outcomes\nbased on many possible choices of action. We can only know what one choice\nwas made, see the outcome\nof that choice and only guess whether that outcome would have been better\nor worse than if other choices\nwere made. God can see all possible choices and all possible outcomes\nmaking Him the perfect moral agent.\nTzadkiel's ability approaches this making him/her far, far more morally\nadvanced than an adult is to a child.\nThus our own moral judgement of Tzadkiel's or God's actions is of\nnegligible importance.\n\n-bsharp\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nUse video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger.\n\nhttp://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_072008\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807111213v2982cea3mf946bd899c2ddd68@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T19:13:47+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370807111154m6be8a48qbae63dc80f56adac@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Took the words right out of my mouth, you did.\n\nI did go back and read over the previous 60+ posts of \"Ushas\", about the\nonly thing mentioned as evidence was Tzadkiel's statement that the agonies\nof Urth will be \"offered to the Increate\". (Doesn't that sound sorta\nbarbaric, incidentally?) And here I was all set to ask whether the\nHierogrammates even mentioned the Increate, heh. At least they also seem to\nbelieve he exists.\n\nHowever, there's a leap between this and saying they're privy to his Plan,\nhey?\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes \nwrote:\nOn Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "That was pretty much the discussion in progress just before you arrived." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm\nnot convinced that God has no part in a plan involving the White\nFountain;" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "as the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe, He is responsible\nfor\nits content and as such He kills everyone and destroys everything that\npasseth away. How he implements His will and whether the intermediaries\nare\nservants, sock puppets, or dupes is what we are sorting out." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well, there's a further point here: one can claim that *any* action, by\n*anyone*, is part of God's Plan. To do this is to create moral anarchy\nfor humans -- \"Yes, I killed six million Jews, but that was part of God's\nplan, so it's okay.\" No, I don't think so; the only way to theodicize this\nis\nby assuming an extreme Calvinist-predestinarian stance.\n\nThe only way to say that the Hiero*s don't share the same moral\nburden as humans is to say that they have direct knowledge of\nGod's will. This is the justification for the Israelites' slaughter of the\nnatives of Canaan -- \"God said so,\" which trumped \"Thou shalt\nnot murder.\"\n\nSo to justify the Hiero*s' actions, to say that their plan that involved\nthe slaughter of Urth's billions, was morally OK, means that you have\nto present evidence that they have a direct knowledge of the will\nof the Increate, which I do not see in the text.\n\n--\nDan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\n\nI once absend-mindedly ordered Three Mile Island dressing in a\nrestaurant and, with great presence of mind, they brought Thousand\nIsland Dressing and a bottle of chili sauce. -- T. Pratchett\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4877B2C8.6060505@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T19:21:44+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370807111154m6be8a48qbae63dc80f56adac@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nOn Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "That was pretty much the discussion in progress just before you arrived. I'm\nnot convinced that God has no part in a plan involving the White Fountain;\nas the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe, He is responsible for\nits content and as such He kills everyone and destroys everything that\npasseth away. How he implements His will and whether the intermediaries are\nservants, sock puppets, or dupes is what we are sorting out." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well, there's a further point here: one can claim that *any* action, by\n*anyone*, is part of God's Plan. To do this is to create moral anarchy\nfor humans -- \"Yes, I killed six million Jews, but that was part of God's\nplan, so it's okay.\" No, I don't think so; the only way to theodicize this is\nby assuming an extreme Calvinist-predestinarian stance." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't subscribe to the usual free will/predestiny dichotomy. You can't \nescape God's plan because He's eternal and outside of time and space, \nany more than A. Square can escape the observation and intervention of \nthree-dimensional beings hovering over Flatland. Your choices still make \na difference in how you will fit into His plan, and His delivered wisdom \n as trickled down to you may influence those choices. Presumably, the \ncloser one hews to righteousness, the less suffering all round." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The only way to say that the Hiero*s don't share the same moral\nburden as humans is to say that they have direct knowledge of\nGod's will." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I move that we adopt my term \"Yesodis\" to mean the current and former \ninhabitants of Yesod during the period of the Book and their non-human \nservants, including the Hierodules, Hierogrammates, and Hieros. It's \ncertainly easier to spell and shorter." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This is the justification for the Israelites' slaughter of the\nnatives of Canaan -- \"God said so,\" which trumped \"Thou shalt\nnot murder.\"\n\nSo to justify the Hiero*s' actions, to say that their plan that involved\nthe slaughter of Urth's billions, was morally OK, means that you have\nto present evidence that they have a direct knowledge of the will\nof the Increate, which I do not see in the text." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't see much evidence that the Yesodis are the proximate cause. It's \npossible that they created the the White Fountain, but it seems to be \nSeverian who draws it to Urth. They seem to work pretty hard to make \nsure he is there to keep it from striking Urth at the last second, too." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807111231l67cb2c37r4eec5f34aa0b8d2c@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T19:31:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<4877B2C8.6060505@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nI move that we adopt my term \"Yesodis\" to mean the current and former\ninhabitants of Yesod during the period of the Book and their non-human\nservants, including the Hierodules, Hierogrammates, and Hieros. It's\ncertainly easier to spell and shorter." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This term isn't terribly good because it confounds the human Hieros with the\nalien Hierogrammates, as well as confounding the present with the past.\n\nI don't see much evidence that the Yesodis are the proximate cause. It's" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "possible that they created the the White Fountain, but it seems to be\nSeverian who draws it to Urth. They seem to work pretty hard to make sure he\nis there to keep it from striking Urth at the last second, too." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I bet God didn't put a black hole in Urth's sun either. It's pretty likely\nhe had little to do with the white hole, too. The personal power Severian\nholds in these matters seems to be uncertain at best, no? How did you get\nthe conclusion that he's responsible for the white hole not striking Urth?\nOr directing it at all, for that matter." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--\nJeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4877B965.2050709@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T19:49:57+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<3e1fa2e90807111231l67cb2c37r4eec5f34aa0b8d2c@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Paul B wrote:\n\n\nOn Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Jeff Wilson > wrote:\n\n I move that we adopt my term \"Yesodis\" to mean the current and\n former inhabitants of Yesod during the period of the Book and their\n non-human servants, including the Hierodules, Hierogrammates, and\n Hieros. It's certainly easier to spell and shorter.\n\n\nThis term isn't terribly good because it confounds the human Hieros with \nthe alien Hierogrammates, as well as confounding the present with the \npast. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "By confounding do you perhaps mean \"compounding\" or \"conflating\"? That's \nwhat \"Yesodis\" is intended to do, to refer to all of these higher beings \nas a group, and this is useful because they seem to share a cause in \ntheir existence. It can also mean the relevant subset of them in \ncontext, the way \"Axis Forces\" means the Germany, Japan, etc in WWII, \nbut not necessarily all of them every time." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I bet God didn't put a black hole in Urth's sun either. It's pretty \nlikely he had little to do with the white hole, too. The personal power \nSeverian holds in these matters seems to be uncertain at best, no? How \ndid you get the conclusion that he's responsible for the white hole not \nstriking Urth? Or directing it at all, for that matter." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "He draws on its power numerous times, and I don't think \"draw\" is purely \nmetaphorical. And if he's not there at the end to bring the New Sun for \nUshas, why is he there at all?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807111310o586460eax941a8d46d91c3db2@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T20:10:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<4877B965.2050709@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nPaul B wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Jeff Wilson > wrote:\n\n I move that we adopt my term \"Yesodis\" to mean the current and\n former inhabitants of Yesod during the period of the Book and their\n non-human servants, including the Hierodules, Hierogrammates, and\n Hieros. It's certainly easier to spell and shorter.\n\n\nThis term isn't terribly good because it confounds the human Hieros with\nthe alien Hierogrammates, as well as confounding the present with the past." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "By confounding do you perhaps mean \"compounding\" or \"conflating\"? That's\nwhat \"Yesodis\" is intended to do, to refer to all of these higher beings as\na group, and this is useful because they seem to share a cause in their\nexistence. It can also mean the relevant subset of them in context, the way\n\"Axis Forces\" means the Germany, Japan, etc in WWII, but not necessarily all\nof them every time." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I still stand by \"confounding\", simply because the humans aren't the aliens,\nand then isn't now. What is the common purpose of \"the Yesodis\" - how are\nthey alike, and who are they different from? Organizations of nomenclature\nlike \"Axis\" have obvious commonalities and differences as regards others.\nIf both humans and aliens are \"Yesodis\" then and now, who isn't one? If you\nlike, you could call the humans (Hieros) Side A, and the aliens\n(Hierogrammates, Hierodules) Side B. That seems clearer.\n\nHe draws on its power numerous times, and I don't think \"draw\" is purely" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "metaphorical. And if he's not there at the end to bring the New Sun for\nUshas, why is he there at all?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To write the BotNS, of course :-) His role can be purely symbolic, and\nstill terribly important to Side B (har) plans." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--\nJeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370807111313ve3c4907mafd78e4639c23e42@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T20:13:21+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<4877B2C8.6060505@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nI don't subscribe to the usual free will/predestiny dichotomy. You can't\nescape God's plan because He's eternal and outside of time and space, any\nmore than A. Square can escape the observation and intervention of\nthree-dimensional beings hovering over Flatland. Your choices still make a\ndifference in how you will fit into His plan, and His delivered wisdom as\ntrickled down to you may influence those choices. Presumably, the closer one\nhews to righteousness, the less suffering all round." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I agree with everything you say here, wiht the possible exception of\nthe last sentence (God seems to like suffering and sacrifice an\nawful lot).\n\nI was pointing out that there are two ways to say that the Hiero*s' (or\nYesodis' or whatever) actions re: Urth are not morally wrong, or at\nleast morally questionable. One is to say that they are privy to God's\nwill; the other is to say that God predestined them to do it and that it\nis therefore God's will.\n\nSince I don't buy into either of these, at least pending some serious\ntextual evidence that God is talking to them (or that Wolfe is a\npredestinarian), I regard them as morally questionable at best." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I move that we adopt my term \"Yesodis\" to mean the current and former\ninhabitants of Yesod during the period of the Book and their non-human\nservants, including the Hierodules, Hierogrammates, and Hieros. It's\ncertainly easier to spell and shorter." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Eh. It sounds to me like a terrorist group." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't see much evidence that the Yesodis are the proximate cause. It's\npossible that they created the the White Fountain, but it seems to be\nSeverian who draws it to Urth. They seem to work pretty hard to make sure he\nis there to keep it from striking Urth at the last second, too." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The source of the White Fountain is Severian's mating with Apheta. The\nH/Ys knew that would happen, and brought Severian to Yesod specifically\nto do this. Due to their freedom of time, they knew the results of creating\nit. Ergo, they bear moral responsibility for its effects.\n\nOne can argue that they also know that this is better than the alternative,\nbut that still begs the question of not evacuating the planet when they have\nbeen shown to have the capability to do so. They choose to let billions die." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\n\nI once absend-mindedly ordered Three Mile Island dressing in a\nrestaurant and, with great presence of mind, they brought Thousand\nIsland Dressing and a bottle of chili sauce. -- T. Pratchett" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807111319m194cbf02gb576e9f2510c7493@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T20:19:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370807111313ve3c4907mafd78e4639c23e42@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes \nwrote:\n\nThe source of the White Fountain is Severian's mating with Apheta. The\nH/Ys knew that would happen, and brought Severian to Yesod specifically\nto do this. Due to their freedom of time, they knew the results of creating\nit. Ergo, they bear moral responsibility for its effects." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Really? I had always had a hard time picturing Severian literally giving\nbirth to an astrophysical anomaly by having sex with an alien. I'd assumed\nit was something he was told or decided for himself since he spent his time\nin Yesod doing Apheta instead of asking some much-warranted questions." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--\nDan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4877CF79.7000606@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T21:24:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370807111313ve3c4907mafd78e4639c23e42@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nOn Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I don't subscribe to the usual free will/predestiny dichotomy. You can't\nescape God's plan because He's eternal and outside of time and space, any\nmore than A. Square can escape the observation and intervention of\nthree-dimensional beings hovering over Flatland. Your choices still make a\ndifference in how you will fit into His plan, and His delivered wisdom as\ntrickled down to you may influence those choices. Presumably, the closer one\nhews to righteousness, the less suffering all round." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I agree with everything you say here, wiht the possible exception of\nthe last sentence (God seems to like suffering and sacrifice an\nawful lot)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Loss is necessary, or at least unavoidable, and presumably loss in the \nname of God (sacrifice) is better than loss for no reason. I agree that \nwhenever wrong is done there is a price to be paid (and usually one for \ndoing right, for that matter), but I don't think gratuitous loss is \nrighteous.\n\nGod also likes beetles, but I don't think 300000 varieties are strictly \nnecessary." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I was pointing out that there are two ways to say that the Hiero*s' (or\nYesodis' or whatever) actions re: Urth are not morally wrong, or at\nleast morally questionable. One is to say that they are privy to God's\nwill; the other is to say that God predestined them to do it and that it\nis therefore God's will.\n\nSince I don't buy into either of these, at least pending some serious\ntextual evidence that God is talking to them (or that Wolfe is a\npredestinarian), I regard them as morally questionable at best." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The disappearance/ascenscion of the Hieros leaves a suggestive gap. \nWolfe may have borrowed a page from Teilhard De Chardin and had the \nHieros join with the Godhead at the end of their bang-gnab and relay an \nutterance from the Increate before completion. The Hierogrammates would \nbe working from this received wisdom ever since, and are eager to uplift \nhumanity to Hieros-status so they can receive word from the Outsider if \nthey have been successful or not." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I move that we adopt my term \"Yesodis\" to mean the current and former\ninhabitants of Yesod during the period of the Book and their non-human\nservants, including the Hierodules, Hierogrammates, and Hieros. It's\ncertainly easier to spell and shorter." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Eh. It sounds to me like a terrorist group." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not unintentional." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I don't see much evidence that the Yesodis are the proximate cause. It's\npossible that they created the the White Fountain, but it seems to be\nSeverian who draws it to Urth. They seem to work pretty hard to make sure he\nis there to keep it from striking Urth at the last second, too." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The source of the White Fountain is Severian's mating with Apheta. The\nH/Ys knew that would happen, and brought Severian to Yesod specifically\nto do this. Due to their freedom of time, they knew the results of creating\nit. Ergo, they bear moral responsibility for its effects.\n\nOne can argue that they also know that this is better than the alternative,\nbut that still begs the question of not evacuating the planet when they have\nbeen shown to have the capability to do so. They choose to let billions die." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think there are billions left on Urth, millions perhaps. But \nwhere will they put the millions in a colonized galaxy?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370807111446m2a2ed50fycc314d7dcbe6a401@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T21:46:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<4877CF79.7000606@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nThe disappearance/ascenscion of the Hieros leaves a suggestive gap. Wolfe\nmay have borrowed a page from Teilhard De Chardin and had the Hieros join\nwith the Godhead at the end of their bang-gnab and relay an utterance from\nthe Increate before completion. The Hierogrammates would be working from\nthis received wisdom ever since, and are eager to uplift humanity to\nHieros-status so they can receive word from the Outsider if they have been\nsuccessful or not." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Certainly a possibility. This begs the question though: is there textual\nevidence that they have, in fact, had a Word from God?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Eh. It sounds to me like a terrorist group." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Not unintentional." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "...heh..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think there are billions left on Urth, millions perhaps. But where\nwill they put the millions in a colonized galaxy?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "South America alone has the teeming metropolis of Nessus, smaller cities,\nand North America has the hive-like Ascians. I would be surprised if Urth's\npopulation -- this is the \"do-nothing\" future -- is much less than that of our\nEarth today.\n\nBut, whether millions or billions, the question of \"where to put them\" is\nno greater here than it is in the Ice Future, where the HYs *do* evacuate\nUrth's population. If they can do it there, they can do it here. You played\nit for her, Sam, you can play it for me." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\n\nI once absend-mindedly ordered Three Mile Island dressing in a\nrestaurant and, with great presence of mind, they brought Thousand\nIsland Dressing and a bottle of chili sauce. -- T. Pratchett" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4877D8B7.5080801@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2008-07-11T22:03:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370807111446m2a2ed50fycc314d7dcbe6a401@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nOn Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The disappearance/ascenscion of the Hieros leaves a suggestive gap. Wolfe\nmay have borrowed a page from Teilhard De Chardin and had the Hieros join\nwith the Godhead at the end of their bang-gnab and relay an utterance from\nthe Increate before completion. The Hierogrammates would be working from\nthis received wisdom ever since, and are eager to uplift humanity to\nHieros-status so they can receive word from the Outsider if they have been\nsuccessful or not." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Certainly a possibility. This begs the question though: is there textual\nevidence that they have, in fact, had a Word from God?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm hoping to gather some on my next, \"Sister Juturna\" read-through, as \nsoon as I can gather new copies of the volumes." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Eh. It sounds to me like a terrorist group." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Not unintentional." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "...heh..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I don't think there are billions left on Urth, millions perhaps. But where\nwill they put the millions in a colonized galaxy?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "South America alone has the teeming metropolis of Nessus, smaller cities,\nand North America has the hive-like Ascians. I would be surprised if Urth's\npopulation -- this is the \"do-nothing\" future -- is much less than that of our\nEarth today." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nessus isn't exactly \"teeming\" as there are five buildings for each \ninhabitant. I'm skeptical of there being many Ascians in NA; what are \nthey eating, cans of Dinty Moore left from the Age of Myth?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But, whether millions or billions, the question of \"where to put them\" is\nno greater here than it is in the Ice Future, where the HYs *do* evacuate\nUrth's population. If they can do it there, they can do it here. You played\nit for her, Sam, you can play it for me." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "*Some* of the population, plus the ice future gives much more time to \ndepopulate Urth in small, easy to settle bites." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<001b01c8e3bc$04614720$b8cc4a0c@rclackey.stic.net>", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2008-07-12T01:10:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<4877D8B7.5080801@io.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Paul Borochin quoted and wrote:\nOn Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The source of the White Fountain is Severian's mating with Apheta. The\nH/Ys knew that would happen, and brought Severian to Yesod specifically\nto do this. Due to their freedom of time, they knew the results of\ncreating\nit. Ergo, they bear moral responsibility for its effects." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Really? I had always had a hard time picturing Severian literally giving\nbirth to an astrophysical anomaly by having sex with an alien. I'd assumed\nit was something he was told or decided for himself since he spent his time\nin Yesod doing Apheta instead of asking some much-warranted questions." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Of course fathering a white hole on an insect is absurd. But so are Time\nCorridors, FTL ships, astral travel, aquastors, ghosts, blood-sucking\nshape-shifting reptiles that can fly high and fast enough to achieve escape\nvelocity then travel through vacuum and land on another planet safely,\nwerewolves, etc., etc., many of which have been used in the Sun Cycle by\nWolfe. You just have to accept it, like vampires in a vampire story.\n\nAnd you are right, Hieros and Hierogrammates can't be lumped together by one\nterm; they are as profoundly different as cause and effect, and there ain't\nno damn Hieros who actually appear in the Urth Cycle--identified as such,\nanyway.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-12T04:30:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<001b01c8e3bc$04614720$b8cc4a0c@rclackey.stic.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Paul B, I still think you are missing the crucial factor and thus missing some of the\nbest of what science fiction and religious philosophy has to offer in regard to the \nsuperhuman (and sorry if my last post sounded testy, it wasn't meant to). Your \nexample of a surgeon harvesting organs from a \"worthless\" bum to save \"great\"\nmen demonstrates my position quite well, so I'll use it. \n\nDespite your assertion that the surgeon has foresight in this situation you are wrong. \nThe surgeon is only guessing, making a judgement that the bum is worthless and that\nthe men he saves are great and more worthy of life. The surgeon has no way to know\nwith certainty whether the bum would become a world-saving saint if he had lived \nanother year. Or if one of the great men he saves will become a genocidal monster \nwithin a year. He is gambling with people's lives and dealing out death based on his\nown limited value judgements. That is why utilitarianism is a bankrupt basis for morality;\n it involves gambling. Gambling with other people's lives but relying on less than perfect\n knowledge and judgement. Yep, the surgeon here is \"playing God\".\n\nBut God (or a god-like omniscient being) is not gambling or making individual value \njudgements in his/her/its actions. God knows exactly what the bum and the great men\nwill become within a year and beyond. He not only knows that, he knows what the exact\nimpact of a death or a life or even the flap of a butterfly's wing will have on every single \nother living creature on earth, yea the effect it will have on every quark and every galaxy\nin the universe through eternity. No gambling involved at all.\n\nThis sort of certainty of consequences places God in a moral postion impossible to compare\nto your surgeon or Gandhi or any other human being. We cannot judge such a God or \nunderstand it because it is so far from human comprehension. But I will go out on a limb \nto suggest that God's omniscience in understanding of consequences is so complete as to \noffer no choices of action. All that is done must be done to provide the best possible outcome.\nIn other words, God has no free will. And thus God has a moral position equal to a rock and \nthe equivalence to a rock in being subject to moral judgement by humans.\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<881403.32939.qm@web58212.mail.re3.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2008-07-12T05:29:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<3e1fa2e90807110849p7e143749ne8487e847665b181@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Society often works in just such a tiered moral fashion, with the good of the many (ie laws and government) justifying and assigning the taking of life, as any executioner would be able to argue.\n\nOf course, I can stomach the idea without too many moral qualms. \n--- On Fri, 7/11/08, Paul B wrote:\n\n\n\nHowever, granting them exceptions simply because they know more, or are more powerful, is silly. There are more and less powerful and wise humans too, but suggesting that one can get away with murder (for a good cause, trust me!) isn't something most can stomach.\n\n\n\n\n " } ] }, { "message_id": "<487841C1.6070305@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2008-07-12T05:31:45+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370807111446m2a2ed50fycc314d7dcbe6a401@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nBut, whether millions or billions, the question of \"where to put them\" is\nno greater here than it is in the Ice Future, where the HYs *do* evacuate\nUrth's population. If they can do it there, they can do it here. You played\nit for her, Sam, you can play it for me." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "After further cogitation, it has occurred to me that the Botanical \nGardens are the Yesodi evacution plan for Urth. A fairly feeble one, \nbut I realized they *are* resource limited, in fact VERY limited if you \nconsider the machine planet, perhaps as big as a solar system, is split \nup into fairly small sections, each devoted to the salvation of an \nentire galaxy." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<000a01c8e3ff$845b4a00$06ce4a0c@rclackey.stic.net>", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2008-07-12T09:13:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<487841C1.6070305@io.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "b sharp wrote:\nYour\nexample of a surgeon harvesting organs from a \"worthless\" bum to save\n\"great\"\nmen demonstrates my position quite well, so I'll use it.\n\nDespite your assertion that the surgeon has foresight in this situation you\nare wrong." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No, he is not. It was a stipulated condition of his cited example: \"Like a\nfancy Hierogrammate, you have foresight in this one case, and killing this\nhobo will in fact produce greater good.\" You may not like his example, but\nthat's a different issue." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The surgeon is only guessing, making a judgement that the bum is worthless\nand that\nthe men he saves are great and more worthy of life. The surgeon has no way\nto know\nwith certainty whether the bum would become a world-saving saint if he had\nlived\nanother year. Or if one of the great men he saves will become a genocidal\nmonster\nwithin a year. He is gambling with people's lives and dealing out death\nbased on his\nown limited value judgements. That is why utilitarianism is a bankrupt\nbasis for morality;\nit involves gambling. Gambling with other people's lives but relying on\nless than perfect\nknowledge and judgement. Yep, the surgeon here is \"playing God\".\n\nBut God (or a god-like omniscient being) is not gambling or making\nindividual value\njudgements in his/her/its actions." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wrong. That is exactly what god-like Tzadkiel did; gamble on probabilities:\n------------------------------------\n \"How is it that Tzadkiel could say my examination was\nover, when the aquastors had to fight and die to save me?\"\n \"The aquastors did not die,\" Apheta told me. \"They live\nin you. As for Tzadkiel, he spoke as he did because it was\nthe truth. He had examined the future and found the\nchance high that you would bring a fresh sun to your Urth,\nand thus save that strand of your race, so that it might\nproduce ours in your Briahtic universe. It was on that\nexamination that everything hinged; it was over, and the\nresult favorable to you.\" (URTH, XXII, 160)\n-------------------------------------" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "God knows exactly what the bum and the great men\nwill become within a year and beyond. He not only knows that, he knows\nwhat the exact\nimpact of a death or a life or even the flap of a butterfly's wing will\nhave on every single\nother living creature on earth, yea the effect it will have on every quark\nand every galaxy\nin the universe through eternity. No gambling involved at all." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Maybe so, for the religious minded: It is also irrelevant. This is headed\ntoward the freewill/predetermination issues I said just a month ago when\nthis was last debated that I wanted to steer clear of because it leads\nnowhere, and ends all reasoned argument. God gets a blank pass on\naccountability in this discussion, but that's not what it's about. It is\nabout whether or not the Hierogrammates get the same blank pass.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-12T20:34:53+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<000a01c8e3ff$845b4a00$06ce4a0c@rclackey.stic.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Roy thanks for your clarification. I misread or misunderstood Paul's qualification that the surgeon\nhad foresight. I agree that the discussion should move on to its proper subject, the Hierogrammates,\nbut I felt it was important to establish the ultimate moral superiority which comes with the God-like\nforesight that includes impact on every atom in the universe.\n\nI get the impression Paul is sneering at the notion that some individuals have better moral \njudgement than others. Yet our entire way of life is based on the notion. We give no credence\nto the moral authority of invertebrate animals and very little to even the most intelligent animals.\nChildren start with almost none and are gradually given more as they attain adulthood. Some \nadults are given more moral authority than others and some are even elected and paid to do nothing\nbut make moral decisions that affect the lives of others.\n\nAs I see it, Wolfe, with this story, and religions which espouse angelic beings are proposing that there \nare individuals who have less moral authority than God but have more than any human. Thus if Paul B\nor Peter Wright feels justified in making moral judgement on Hierogrammates or angels, well, they are\nallowed to but (pretending Hieros and angels are real) they are not qualified. They are like the \nendangered mountain gorilla who judges the game warden who protects them and the poacher as equally\n\"bad\" because they both intrude on territory and drive noisy, scary metal boxes.\n\nI don't know if angels really exist but I think Gene Wolfe thinks they do. And I think he intended \nHierogrammates to represent them as beings much closer to God than humans and thus morally superior\nto us. They are not meant to be evil manipulative aliens though they might look like they are from a gorilla\nperspective ;-).\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3D9A898D-6B5A-4C38-A0ED-3FC4626450D5@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-12T22:38:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It may not be that the Hierogrammates are \"morally superior\" to \nhumans, in that we all have the same capacity for judging moral and \nimmoral actions, but rather that their nature makes them able to \nperceive moral dimensions on acts that we cannot.\n\nIn Kantian philosophy, mankind's knowledge is necessarily limited by \nthe structure of his experience. The linearity of time forces to \nunderstand the world in a causally-regular, temporally-ordered way. We \narrange the manifold of experience according to definitive A-then-B \nschema not because things really _are_ that way, per se, but rather \nbecause _we are that way_ and anything else would be unintelligible.\n\nBut consider the Hieros. They aren't so bound to live life in one \ndirection, and indeed, may experience time and cause-effect in \n_reverse_. For humans, then, we judge death, even the deaths of \nmillions, to be immoral or bad because we, bound up as we are in our \nlinear thinking, cannot conceive that there might be something truly \n_after_ death. I think that most people hope for an afterlife, but \nnone of us really knows, in the true sense of knowledge, that there is \nsuch a thing.\n\nMy problem, however, with viewing the flood as a \"necessary evil\" is \nthat it attempts to define what is \"good\" or \"bad\" by its effects. \nIt's consequentialist, and I object categorically to all forms of \nutilitarianism. Rather, if the flood has any moral dimension at all \n(which it might not) it must be good or bad in itself. The Kantian \ntest for such a thing would be whether a rational being in Severian's \nstead, knowing all of the relevant details about his action, would \nhave brought the white fountain and re-energized the sun. The effects \nof that, such as causing the deaths of all the Urthlings, are \nsecondary to the question of whether the New Sun itself is moral. As \nto whether Ushas is preferable to Urth, I think that, at least in \nWolfe's universe, that question isn't answerable by a human, because \nwe would lack the sort of insight in to things that the Hierogrammates \npossess, being so unbound by time.\n\nLane" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Jul 12, 2008, at 3:34 PM, b sharp wrote:\n\n\nRoy thanks for your clarification. I misread or misunderstood Paul's \nqualification that the surgeon\nhad foresight. I agree that the discussion should move on to its \nproper subject, the Hierogrammates,\nbut I felt it was important to establish the ultimate moral \nsuperiority which comes with the God-like\nforesight that includes impact on every atom in the universe.\n\nI get the impression Paul is sneering at the notion that some \nindividuals have better moral\njudgement than others. Yet our entire way of life is based on the \nnotion. We give no credence\nto the moral authority of invertebrate animals and very little to \neven the most intelligent animals.\nChildren start with almost none and are gradually given more as they \nattain adulthood. Some\nadults are given more moral authority than others and some are even \nelected and paid to do nothing\nbut make moral decisions that affect the lives of others.\n\nAs I see it, Wolfe, with this story, and religions which espouse \nangelic beings are proposing that there\nare individuals who have less moral authority than God but have more \nthan any human. Thus if Paul B\nor Peter Wright feels justified in making moral judgement on \nHierogrammates or angels, well, they are\nallowed to but (pretending Hieros and angels are real) they are not \nqualified. They are like the\nendangered mountain gorilla who judges the game warden who protects \nthem and the poacher as equally\n\"bad\" because they both intrude on territory and drive noisy, scary \nmetal boxes.\n\nI don't know if angels really exist but I think Gene Wolfe thinks \nthey do. And I think he intended\nHierogrammates to represent them as beings much closer to God than \nhumans and thus morally superior\nto us. They are not meant to be evil manipulative aliens though \nthey might look like they are from a gorilla\nperspective ;-).\n\n-bsharp\n_________________________________________________________________\nUse video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live \nMessenger.\nhttp://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_072008\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<001001c8e47a$1f1b8760$39cf4a0c@rclackey.stic.net>", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2008-07-12T23:50:48+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<3D9A898D-6B5A-4C38-A0ED-3FC4626450D5@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "b sharp wrote:\nI agree that the discussion should move on to its proper subject, the\nHierogrammates,\nbut I felt it was important to establish the ultimate moral superiority\nwhich comes with the God-like\nforesight that includes impact on every atom in the universe." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The textual quote I made establishes conclusively that the Hierogrammates\n*do not* have \"God-like foresight that includes impact on every atom in the\nuniverse.\" Far from it. Tzadkiel was not only an admitted liar, he was a\ncheater as well. He peeked into the future to handicap his gamble that\nSeverian would bring a fresh sun to bring about Ushas and the hoped-for goal\nof establishing the Hieros in Briah. He found the probability of success\nexceeded fifty-fifty odds, so he judged the destruction of Urth worth the\ngamble. Then, in a sop to freewill, Sev still had to win the fight with the\nsailors after the Trial--unless you are willing to concede that the outcome\nof the fight was rigged." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I get the impression Paul is sneering at the notion that some individuals\nhave better moral\njudgement than others. Yet our entire way of life is based on the notion." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "We give no credence" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "to the moral authority of invertebrate animals and very little to even the\nmost intelligent animals.\nChildren start with almost none and are gradually given more as they attain\nadulthood. Some\nadults are given more moral authority than others and some are even\nelected and paid to do nothing\nbut make moral decisions that affect the lives of others." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Being elected to a given position is hardly a qualifier for the morality of\nthe elected. History books and today's newspapers are replete with examples.\nThe power of the state to impose its will on people does not confer right\naction. History books etc." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "As I see it, Wolfe, with this story, and religions which espouse angelic\nbeings are proposing that there\nare individuals who have less moral authority than God but have more than\nany human. Thus if Paul B\nor Peter Wright feels justified in making moral judgement on Hierogrammates\nor angels, well, they are\nallowed to but (pretending Hieros and angels are real) they are not\nqualified." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That is some very curious logic. You have presented a closed system that, by\ndefinition, not only excludes challenges from outside the system, it\ndismisses those challenges as down-right impertinent." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "They are like the\nendangered mountain gorilla who judges the game warden who protects them\nand the poacher as equally\n\"bad\" because they both intrude on territory and drive noisy, scary metal\nboxes.\n\nI don't know if angels really exist but I think Gene Wolfe thinks they do." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And I think he intended" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Hierogrammates to represent them as beings much closer to God than humans\nand thus morally superior\nto us. They are not meant to be evil manipulative aliens though they might\nlook like they are from a gorilla\nperspective ;-)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You must know by now that I happen to agree that the Hierogrammates worked\ndirectly for the Increate. But that opinion doesn't make me automatically\nright.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-13T18:11:15+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<001001c8e47a$1f1b8760$39cf4a0c@rclackey.stic.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Lane, I think we do agree that capacity for moral judgement and capacity for moral \nbehavior are different. But I think they are more related than you do. It seems to \nme that greater capacity for moral judgement confers greater moral responsiblity. \nThus animals are generally considered amoral (perhaps with the excpetion of rogue\nelephants or trained tigers who turn on their trainers, thus breaking an established \nmoral code?). A small child who shoots and kills someone is not to blame, etc. A\nwhite collar embezzler who steals from millionaires is going to prison.\n\nThe more you know, the better you are expected to act and the worse you are when\nyou transgress. Thus, Hierogrammates, or angels must be expected to be far more\nmoral than humans. A human murderer is a bad guy but a fallen angel or demon \n(or megatherian?) is evil incarnate for ignoring God's commands, mating with humans, \nstarting trouble on earth etc. They are supposed to know better.\n\nGoing back to my example from a previous post, we can't expect Hierogrammates to \nfollow human morality any more than a human could be expected to follow gorilla society\nmorality, whatever that might be. Hierogrammates seem comfortable with genocide, as \nlong as there is consent from a representative who manages to pass some incomprehensible\n test. The Old Testament God didn't even bother with consent before the flood; just the ark \nwas needed.\n\nI get the impression there are those here who argue that genocide is always wrong, under all \ncircumstances and it doesn't matter what degree of foresight the perpetrator has, genocide is \nalways just plain EVIL. This is a very anthropocentric view but perhaps Justified. Given that \nwe don't seem to have any direct contact with superior beings at this time, perhaps a secular \nhumanist view is superior to the religious view which grants superior morality to God and His \nagents.\n\nBut, since we are dealing with a work of fiction I'll continue to play Angel's Advocate. I'll again\nstate that we are unqualified to judge Hierogrammates and their actions because we don't have\nthe depth and breadth of foresight to do so. Since Genesis is invoked I have to think that Wolfe\nhas put fallen Hierogrammates in his story who have corrupted Urth and humanity and only drastic\naction by good, unfallen angels can provide salvation. Game wardens. Eliminating the diseased \nportion of a population so the healthy remainder has a chance to recover and re-populate.\n\nSo, as Angel's Advocate I am the gorilla trying to convince his fellows that the game warden is good \nbecause he is chasing away the poachers who kill us. And the anti-genocide secular humanists are \nthe other gorillas who say, \"it doesn't matter; not in the slightest. No matter how many of our lives \nare saved. Anyone who invades our territory with noisy metal boxes is EVIL\"\n\nI commend Lane who explained much better than I can why genocide might not be considered evil\nby superhuman beings:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But consider the Hieros. They aren't so bound to live life in one \ndirection, and indeed, may experience time and cause-effect in \n_reverse_. For humans, then, we judge death, even the deaths of \nmillions, to be immoral or bad because we, bound up as we are in our \nlinear thinking, cannot conceive that there might be something truly \n_after_ death. I think that most people hope for an afterlife, but \nnone of us really knows, in the true sense of knowledge, that there is \nsuch a thing." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "-bsharp\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nMaking the world a better place one message at a time.\nhttp://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807141017o3d51d1f2o5822ad1ba5d40de2@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-14T17:17:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I see we haven't moved much farther.\n\nFirstly, I would suggest that you stop calling the Hierogrammates \"angels\".\nThey are created by humans (Hieros), and you have yet to provide convincing\nevidence of their ties to anything godly. Superior knowledge alone is\ncertainly no such evidence (see Baldanders).\n\nSecondly, denying their godliness doesn't make one a \"secular humanist\". It\nmakes one a skeptical reader who doesn't add what he pleases to the text.\n\nFinally, you seem to insist that knowledge and morality are proportional.\nGod knows all, the Hierogrammates know less, the average Urthlings don't\nknow very much, and an arctother knows even less than that. This you insist\nmakes the Urthlings unable to morally judge the Hierogrammates, just as the\narctother can't judge the Urthlings.\n\nEven the Hierogrammates, however, are still making probabilistic guesses, as\nRoy's UotNS quote proves handily. Your system of \"morality\" thus suggests\nthat whoever can make the most informed guess in a closed system is the\nmoral superior and not to be challenged.\n\nNow again consider Baldanders, likely the most knowledgeable, and\nincidentally one of the more immoral, human characters on Urth. I presume\nyou'll balk at the idea that he's the superior moral agent on all of Urth,\nbut I'll look forward to your explanation why this isn't the case given the\nmorality you advocate.\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 2:11 PM, b sharp wrote:\n\nLane, I think we do agree that capacity for moral judgement and capacity\nfor moral\nbehavior are different. But I think they are more related than you do. It\nseems to\nme that greater capacity for moral judgement confers greater moral\nresponsiblity.\nThus animals are generally considered amoral (perhaps with the excpetion of\nrogue\nelephants or trained tigers who turn on their trainers, thus breaking an\nestablished\nmoral code?). A small child who shoots and kills someone is not to blame,\netc. A\nwhite collar embezzler who steals from millionaires is going to prison.\n\nThe more you know, the better you are expected to act and the worse you are\nwhen\nyou transgress. Thus, Hierogrammates, or angels must be expected to be far\nmore\nmoral than humans. A human murderer is a bad guy but a fallen angel or\ndemon\n(or megatherian?) is evil incarnate for ignoring God's commands, mating\nwith humans,\nstarting trouble on earth etc. They are supposed to know better.\n\nGoing back to my example from a previous post, we can't expect\nHierogrammates to\nfollow human morality any more than a human could be expected to follow\ngorilla society\nmorality, whatever that might be. Hierogrammates seem comfortable with\ngenocide, as\nlong as there is consent from a representative who manages to pass some\nincomprehensible\n test. The Old Testament God didn't even bother with consent before the\nflood; just the ark\nwas needed.\n\nI get the impression there are those here who argue that genocide is always\nwrong, under all\ncircumstances and it doesn't matter what degree of foresight the\nperpetrator has, genocide is\nalways just plain EVIL. This is a very anthropocentric view but perhaps\nJustified. Given that\nwe don't seem to have any direct contact with superior beings at this time,\nperhaps a secular\nhumanist view is superior to the religious view which grants superior\nmorality to God and His\nagents.\n\nBut, since we are dealing with a work of fiction I'll continue to play\nAngel's Advocate. I'll again\nstate that we are unqualified to judge Hierogrammates and their actions\nbecause we don't have\nthe depth and breadth of foresight to do so. Since Genesis is invoked I\nhave to think that Wolfe\nhas put fallen Hierogrammates in his story who have corrupted Urth and\nhumanity and only drastic\naction by good, unfallen angels can provide salvation. Game wardens.\n Eliminating the diseased\nportion of a population so the healthy remainder has a chance to recover\nand re-populate.\n\nSo, as Angel's Advocate I am the gorilla trying to convince his fellows\nthat the game warden is good\nbecause he is chasing away the poachers who kill us. And the anti-genocide\nsecular humanists are\nthe other gorillas who say, \"it doesn't matter; not in the slightest. No\nmatter how many of our lives\nare saved. Anyone who invades our territory with noisy metal boxes is EVIL\"\n\nI commend Lane who explained much better than I can why genocide might not\nbe considered evil\nby superhuman beings:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "But consider the Hieros. They aren't so bound to live life in one\ndirection, and indeed, may experience time and cause-effect in\n_reverse_. For humans, then, we judge death, even the deaths of\nmillions, to be immoral or bad because we, bound up as we are in our\nlinear thinking, cannot conceive that there might be something truly\n_after_ death. I think that most people hope for an afterlife, but\nnone of us really knows, in the true sense of knowledge, that there is\nsuch a thing." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-bsharp\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nMaking the world a better place one message at a time.\nhttp://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Thomas Bitterman", "address": "tom at bitterman.net" }, "date": "2008-07-14T17:20:22+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 2:11 PM, b sharp wrote:\nBut, since we are dealing with a work of fiction I'll continue to play\nAngel's Advocate. I'll again state that we are unqualified to judge\nHierogrammates and their actions because we don't have the depth and breadth\nof foresight to do so." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If we cannot judge somebody's actions, what basis do we have for saying the\nactions (or the person) are good?\n\nEnamel" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807141029n20a4a88fq3a92345c3917366d@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-14T17:29:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Good catch! Apparently this disturbing system of \"morality\" also defaults\nto a judgement of \"good\" in cases where a judgement can't be made.\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Thomas Bitterman wrote:\nOn Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 2:11 PM, b sharp wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "But, since we are dealing with a work of fiction I'll continue to play\nAngel's Advocate. I'll again state that we are unqualified to judge\nHierogrammates and their actions because we don't have the depth and breadth\nof foresight to do so." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "If we cannot judge somebody's actions, what basis do we have for saying the\nactions (or the person) are good?\n\nEnamel\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<63FB9AC7E0AEC7459DBCC99DC44247CA016C364F@BOSIDEXDB.Bankofscotland.ie>", "from": { "name": "O'Donnell, Tim BOSI", "address": "tim.o'donnell at bankofscotland.ie" }, "date": "2008-07-15T08:37:15+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<3e1fa2e90807141029n20a4a88fq3a92345c3917366d@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hi Paul,\n\nThe point that I took from this discussion, and I think it is valid, is that the Hieros have the ability to perceive more of\nthe universe than humans; they experience time differently. So when someone talks about knowledge, I take it to refer to this aspect of their\nknowing and not their ability to produce technology, etc. (which is where the similarity with Baldanders comes in).\n\nSo, while the Hieros are still making guesses on the outcome of their actions (who isn't [apart from God] in a quantum universe?) they do have the \nadvantage of having more knowledge of the outcome of events. And so, their moral code differs from the humans who are bound to A->B linear time. \nThis seems a reasonable argument to me.\n\nTim\n\n____________________________________________________________________________________________\n____________________________________________________________________________________________" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Message: 7\nDate: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:17:23 -0400\nFrom: \"Paul B\" \nSubject: Re: (urth) What's So Great About Ushas\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nMessage-ID:\n\t<3e1fa2e90807141017o3d51d1f2o5822ad1ba5d40de2 at mail.gmail.com>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"iso-8859-1\"\n\nI see we haven't moved much farther.\n\nFirstly, I would suggest that you stop calling the Hierogrammates \"angels\".\nThey are created by humans (Hieros), and you have yet to provide convincing\nevidence of their ties to anything godly. Superior knowledge alone is\ncertainly no such evidence (see Baldanders).\n\nSecondly, denying their godliness doesn't make one a \"secular humanist\". It\nmakes one a skeptical reader who doesn't add what he pleases to the text.\n\nFinally, you seem to insist that knowledge and morality are proportional.\nGod knows all, the Hierogrammates know less, the average Urthlings don't\nknow very much, and an arctother knows even less than that. This you insist\nmakes the Urthlings unable to morally judge the Hierogrammates, just as the\narctother can't judge the Urthlings.\n\nEven the Hierogrammates, however, are still making probabilistic guesses, as\nRoy's UotNS quote proves handily. Your system of \"morality\" thus suggests\nthat whoever can make the most informed guess in a closed system is the\nmoral superior and not to be challenged.\n\nNow again consider Baldanders, likely the most knowledgeable, and\nincidentally one of the more immoral, human characters on Urth. I presume\nyou'll balk at the idea that he's the superior moral agent on all of Urth,\nbut I'll look forward to your explanation why this isn't the case given the\nmorality you advocate.\n\nPaul\n************************************************************************************************\nFind out more about us at www.bankofscotland.ie \n\nThe information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error or there are any problems please notify the originator immediately. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is strictly forbidden. This mail and any attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Bank of Scotland Ireland's network. \nBank of Scotland Ireland will not be liable for direct, special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on. Bank of Scotland (Ireland) reserves the right to monitor and record e-mail messages sent to and from this address for the purposes of investigating or detecting any unauthorised use of its system and ensuring its effective operation.\n\nBank of Scotland (Ireland) Limited is part of HBOS plc and is regulated by the Financial Regulator. Registered in Ireland Number: 8454. Registered office: Bank of Scotland House, 124-127 St. Stephens Green, Dublin 2\n\n****************************************************************************************************" } ] }, { "message_id": "<3e1fa2e90807150742k6af1e9b8xbc8acbe82344abf8@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Paul B", "address": "pb.stuff at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-15T14:42:30+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<63FB9AC7E0AEC7459DBCC99DC44247CA016C364F@BOSIDEXDB.Bankofscotland.ie>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No, you misunderstand what I meant by invoking Baldanders, a scientist on a\nplanet without scientists. He _knows_ more than other Urthlings, and can\nmake better guesses than them on a variety of subjects. He \"perceives more\nof the universe\".\n\nAny society is comprised of individuals on a continuum of cognitive\nability. To let this govern morality is unfair at best, and horrifying at\nworst.\nThis is why letting the Hierogrammates off simply on the basis of their\nsuperior understanding is an abhorrent idea.\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 4:37 AM, O'Donnell, Tim (BOSI) <\nTim.O'Donnell at bankofscotland.ie > wrote:\n Hi Paul,\n\nThe point that I took from this discussion, and I think it is valid, is\nthat the Hieros have the ability to perceive more of\n\nthe universe than humans; they experience time differently. So when\nsomeone talks about knowledge, I take it to refer to this aspect of their\n\nknowing and not their ability to produce technology, etc. (which is where\nthe similarity with Baldanders comes in).\n\nSo, while the Hieros are still making guesses on the outcome of their\nactions (who isn't [apart from God] in a quantum universe?) they do have the\n\n\nadvantage of having more knowledge of the outcome of events. And so, their\nmoral code differs from the humans who are bound to A->B linear time.\n\nThis seems a reasonable argument to me.\n\nTim\n\n\n____________________________________________________________________________________________\n\n____________________________________________________________________________________________\n\n\nMessage: 7\nDate: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:17:23 -0400\nFrom: \"Paul B\" \nSubject: Re: (urth) What's So Great About Ushas\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nMessage-ID:\n <3e1fa2e90807141017o3d51d1f2o5822ad1ba5d40de2 at mail.gmail.com>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"iso-8859-1\"\n\nI see we haven't moved much farther.\n\nFirstly, I would suggest that you stop calling the Hierogrammates \"angels\".\nThey are created by humans (Hieros), and you have yet to provide convincing\nevidence of their ties to anything godly. Superior knowledge alone is\ncertainly no such evidence (see Baldanders).\n\nSecondly, denying their godliness doesn't make one a \"secular humanist\".\nIt\nmakes one a skeptical reader who doesn't add what he pleases to the text.\n\nFinally, you seem to insist that knowledge and morality are proportional.\nGod knows all, the Hierogrammates know less, the average Urthlings don't\nknow very much, and an arctother knows even less than that. This you\ninsist\nmakes the Urthlings unable to morally judge the Hierogrammates, just as the\narctother can't judge the Urthlings.\n\nEven the Hierogrammates, however, are still making probabilistic guesses,\nas\nRoy's UotNS quote proves handily. Your system of \"morality\" thus suggests\nthat whoever can make the most informed guess in a closed system is the\nmoral superior and not to be challenged.\n\nNow again consider Baldanders, likely the most knowledgeable, and\nincidentally one of the more immoral, human characters on Urth. I presume\nyou'll balk at the idea that he's the superior moral agent on all of Urth,\nbut I'll look forward to your explanation why this isn't the case given the\nmorality you advocate.\n\nPaul\n\n************************************************************************************************\nFind out more about us at www.bankofscotland.ie \n\nThe information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error or there are any problems please notify the originator immediately. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is strictly forbidden. This mail and any attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Bank of Scotland Ireland's network.\nBank of Scotland Ireland will not be liable for direct, special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on. Bank of Scotland (Ireland) reserves the right to monitor and record e-mail messages sent to and from this address for the purposes of investigating or detecting any unauthorised use of its system and ensuring its effective operation.\n\nBank of Scotland (Ireland) Limited is part of HBOS plc and is regulated by the Financial Regulator. Registered in Ireland Number: 8454. Registered office: Bank of Scotland House, 124-127 St. Stephens Green, Dublin 2\n\n****************************************************************************************************\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-17T12:06:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<3e1fa2e90807150742k6af1e9b8xbc8acbe82344abf8@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Roy says in regard to F, B and O:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Yet they knelt to Severian. I'm sure this must say something about the moral\npecking order. One doesn't usually make obeisance to one's moral inferior." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Adam replies:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At the risk of being really snarky, have you ever held a real job?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nah, that's a pretty funny commentary on bosses!\n\nBrunians notes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's also reminiscent of the bit in the Quran where God creates Adam and\norders the angels to bow to him (all do except Satan and his people)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Interesting, I didn't know that. Suggests the roots of Islam are more humanist\nthan its Judeo-Christian cousins.\n\nAnyway, I don't think these scenes reflect a moral hierarchy. In fact most of the\ntime F, B and O tend to talk down to Severian. They only make obeisance when\nreminded he is the \"head of his race, and saviour\" (I think that was the title). And \nthat race, while inferior, is the ancestor in some sense, of the Hierogrammates or\nat least responsible and necessary for their creation.\n\nEven Tzadkiel is not the head of his race (and savior?). I guess it is implied that \noffice is held by (archangel) Michael, and Lucifer previous to him." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-19T02:53:26+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Paul B, I'm not sure if your last post clarified things for me. I don't begrudge you\ndodging my nosy question about your faith but I am still not sure if you\nare saying you don't think Gene Wolfe intended Hierogrammates to be angels or if\nit is your opinion they are not a good representation of what angels should be like.\n\nJohn Watkins explicitly states he intends to present arguments for Gene Wolfe's intentions \nand gives a list of pros and cons. I think there is a glaring omission in the list of pros and a\nmistake in the list of cons which is continually repeated in this discussion.\n\nMissing in the list of pros is that the only Hierogrammate we see (Apheta and Venant and \nthe other larvae are named Hierarchs) is named \"Tzadkiel\". This name, like Michael or \nGabriel IS the name of a judeo-christian arch-angel. I don't see how much less \ncircumstantial the evidence could be. I suppose Wolfe could have called them \"Angels\" \nall through the text instead of Hierogrammates but I can't think he'd ever stoop to hitting\nhis readers over the head with such a blunt instrument as that. The name Tzadkiel seems\nalready more obvious than his usual.\n\nThe mistake in the list of cons is to say that the Hierogrammates cannot be angels or connected \nto God because they engage in the \"morally dubious, if not outright evil\" behavior such as \ngenocide (I presume). How can it be ignored that God and angels commit genocide left and right in the \nBible? The Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the 10th Plague, the Red Sea on the Egyptian army, \nJericho, the Midianites, the Amorites, the Phillistines, the list goes on and on. How can God and\nangels be re-defined as being incapable of genocide when that's one of the main things they do?\n\nI think only a secular humanist could redefine them as gentle caretakers of precious human life\n(which is why it would be more interesting if Paul B was Christian or Jewish). I see no evidence\nthat Gene Wolfe is a secular humanist and I find it really hard to conceive that he meant \nHierogrammates to represent anything but angels. They look like angels, they act like angels \nthey are named like angels, they live in a higher, heavenly plane like angels.....\nah well. Perhaps it's just me that sees it.\n\n-bsharp" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't know about Paul, but I'd be more interested if we focus on the\nquestion of whether the Hierogrammates are intended to be (unfallen) angels\nby Gene Wolfe. Without my books at hand, the argument for this appears to\nbe:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "1) \"Holy\" is part of their name.\n\n2) Tzadkiel has a winged form that Severian identifies as an angel.\n\n3) Severian thinks Hierogrammates serve the Increate.\n\n4) Wolfe referred to Tzadkiel as an \"angel\" in an interview.\n\nThe argument against the Hierogrammates being angels, as I understand it, is\n\n1) Catholic theology posits that angels are perfectly moral, but the\nHierogrammates frequently engage in morally dubious if not outright evil\nbehavior.\n\n2) Hierogrammates, unlike angels, are not direct creations of God.\n\n3) Most of the arguments that Hierogrammates are angels are hearsay.\n\nI think these are both colorable arguments, but I come down on the \"not\"\nside. The Hierogrammates are obviously *spoken of *as angels, but they are\njust as obviously not two things that are *essential *to the meaning of the\nword \"angel.\">" } ] }, { "message_id": "<9352.72.171.0.141.1216438120.squirrel@brunians.org>", "from": { "name": "brunians at brunians.org", "address": "brunians at brunians.org" }, "date": "2008-07-19T03:28:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Also, Hierogrammate means something like 'Holy Word-carrier' which is\npretty close to the meaning of angel, which is (i believe) messenger....\n\n\n\n." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Paul B, I'm not sure if your last post clarified things for me. I don't\nbegrudge you\ndodging my nosy question about your faith but I am still not sure if you\nare saying you don't think Gene Wolfe intended Hierogrammates to be angels\nor if\nit is your opinion they are not a good representation of what angels\nshould be like.\n\nJohn Watkins explicitly states he intends to present arguments for Gene\nWolfe's intentions\nand gives a list of pros and cons. I think there is a glaring omission in\nthe list of pros and a\nmistake in the list of cons which is continually repeated in this\ndiscussion.\n\nMissing in the list of pros is that the only Hierogrammate we see (Apheta\nand Venant and\nthe other larvae are named Hierarchs) is named \"Tzadkiel\". This name, like\nMichael or\nGabriel IS the name of a judeo-christian arch-angel. I don't see how much\nless\ncircumstantial the evidence could be. I suppose Wolfe could have called\nthem \"Angels\"\nall through the text instead of Hierogrammates but I can't think he'd ever\nstoop to hitting\nhis readers over the head with such a blunt instrument as that. The name\nTzadkiel seems\nalready more obvious than his usual.\n\nThe mistake in the list of cons is to say that the Hierogrammates cannot\nbe angels or connected\nto God because they engage in the \"morally dubious, if not outright evil\"\nbehavior such as\ngenocide (I presume). How can it be ignored that God and angels commit\ngenocide left and right in the\nBible? The Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the 10th Plague, the Red Sea on the\nEgyptian army,\nJericho, the Midianites, the Amorites, the Phillistines, the list goes on\nand on. How can God and\nangels be re-defined as being incapable of genocide when that's one of the\nmain things they do?\n\nI think only a secular humanist could redefine them as gentle caretakers\nof precious human life\n(which is why it would be more interesting if Paul B was Christian or\nJewish). I see no evidence\nthat Gene Wolfe is a secular humanist and I find it really hard to\nconceive that he meant\nHierogrammates to represent anything but angels. They look like angels,\nthey act like angels\nthey are named like angels, they live in a higher, heavenly plane like\nangels.....\nah well. Perhaps it's just me that sees it.\n\n-bsharp" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I don't know about Paul, but I'd be more interested if we focus on the\nquestion of whether the Hierogrammates are intended to be (unfallen)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "angels\nby Gene Wolfe. Without my books at hand, the argument for this appears to\nbe:\n\n1) \"Holy\" is part of their name.\n\n2) Tzadkiel has a winged form that Severian identifies as an angel.\n\n3) Severian thinks Hierogrammates serve the Increate.\n\n4) Wolfe referred to Tzadkiel as an \"angel\" in an interview.\n\nThe argument against the Hierogrammates being angels, as I understand it,\nis\n\n1) Catholic theology posits that angels are perfectly moral, but the\nHierogrammates frequently engage in morally dubious if not outright evil\nbehavior.\n\n2) Hierogrammates, unlike angels, are not direct creations of God.\n\n3) Most of the arguments that Hierogrammates are angels are hearsay.\n\nI think these are both colorable arguments, but I come down on the \"not\"\nside. The Hierogrammates are obviously *spoken of *as angels, but they\nare\njust as obviously not two things that are *essential *to the meaning of\nthe\nword \"angel.\">\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nKeep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety.\nhttp://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_family_safety_072008\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4881C8CB.9020301@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2008-07-19T10:58:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "<9352.72.171.0.141.1216438120.squirrel@brunians.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "brunians at brunians.org wrote:\n\nAlso, Hierogrammate means something like 'Holy Word-carrier' which is\npretty close to the meaning of angel, which is (i believe) messenger...." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "angelos is Greek for messenger, but Hierogrammate was used in the 1600s \nto mean holy scribe - related, but not the same. It does however match \nsomeone who records the Increate's rescripts. If Omar Khayyam's most \nfamous metaphor is in play then the holy scribes are also the \ncontrollers of destiny, or and those who record recripts are the ones \nwho *change* destinies - all very much the sort of things going on in \nthe Book + Urth." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<93d4039f0807190728p1b5dbaadwcbfed472235a9c49@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "John Watkins", "address": "john.watkins04 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2008-07-19T14:28:03+00:00", "subject": "(urth) What's So Great About Ushas", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "At least one quibble--\"Tzadkiel\" is the name of an angel in the Jewish\nmystical tradition. That tradition, like the Kabbalah, is outside the\nChristian tradition. Catholics normally confine the list of\narchangels to the three named in Scriptural sources: Michael,\nGabriel, Raphael. I feel this is significant because Wolfe, in his\ninterview with James B. Jordan says in reference to the cabalistic\nmaterial he used \"I have the great disadvantage of not believing in\nit and so I can't get so caught up in it as cabalist really do. To me\nit was someplace that I could steal ideas and names from.\"\n\nInterestingly, in that same interview, Wolfe calls Tzadkiel \"an angel\nof justice,\" whereas according to Jewish tradition, Tzadkiel is an\nangel of mercy, identified with the \"angel of the Lord\" who stops\nAbraham from sacrificing Isaac. So that's part of my response to your\npoint about what \"angels\" do in the Old Testament--to point out that\naccording to tradition Tzadkiel, at least, rejects human sacrifice,\nthe very thing Wolfe's Tzadkiel seems to delight in--\"The\ndeath-agonies of the world you know will be offered to the Increate.\nAnd they will be indescribable.\"\n\nThe other part of my response is more complicated, so I'll just give\nit in brief--I would be very surprised if Wolfe turned out to be a\nliteral believer in the Flood, but the Flood, at any rate, is God's\nwork, not the work of angels. So to were the fall of the walls at\nJericho and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Your other\nexamples are not examples of genocide or of divine or angelic\naction--the Midianites lost a decisive military encounter after God\ngave Gideon some tactical tips, the Amorites were defeated by Joshua\nand show up later as a peaceful neighbor of Israel, the Philistines\nwere eventually wiped out by the Babylonian Empire after several wars\nwith the Hebrews, etc. You missed the Assyrian army wiped out by an\nangel, but it'd be a waste of time to explain how an angel destroy an\ninvading army is a poor analogy to artificial lifeforms created by\nfuturistic humans can drown an entire planet's population.\n\nA further question. If Wolfe is so gung-ho about an allegedly\nbloodthirsty God with equally bloodthirsty angels, where are they\noutside the New Sun books? Is Michael in the Wizard Knight so\nbloodthirsty? Are the gods promoting war and human sacrifice in the\nLong Sun the Increate, or the false gods? Does SilkHorn's (who's\nfairly dialed-in the the Increate, what with the theophanies) approach\nto the inhumi in Short Sun reflect the ethics of Jesus Christ, or the\nethics of Tzadkiel of the Urth of the New Sun?\n\nI do agree whole-heartedly with one of your sentences, however. \"The\nname Tzadkiel seems already more obvious than usual.\" Quite\nso--suspiciously so." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:53 PM, b sharp wrote:\n\nPaul B, I'm not sure if your last post clarified things for me. I don't begrudge you\ndodging my nosy question about your faith but I am still not sure if you\nare saying you don't think Gene Wolfe intended Hierogrammates to be angels or if\nit is your opinion they are not a good representation of what angels should be like.\n\nJohn Watkins explicitly states he intends to present arguments for Gene Wolfe's intentions\nand gives a list of pros and cons. I think there is a glaring omission in the list of pros and a\nmistake in the list of cons which is continually repeated in this discussion.\n\nMissing in the list of pros is that the only Hierogrammate we see (Apheta and Venant and\nthe other larvae are named Hierarchs) is named \"Tzadkiel\". This name, like Michael or\nGabriel IS the name of a judeo-christian arch-angel. I don't see how much less\ncircumstantial the evidence could be. I suppose Wolfe could have called them \"Angels\"\nall through the text instead of Hierogrammates but I can't think he'd ever stoop to hitting\nhis readers over the head with such a blunt instrument as that. The name Tzadkiel seems\nalready more obvious than his usual.\n\nThe mistake in the list of cons is to say that the Hierogrammates cannot be angels or connected\nto God because they engage in the \"morally dubious, if not outright evil\" behavior such as\ngenocide (I presume). How can it be ignored that God and angels commit genocide left and right in the\nBible? The Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the 10th Plague, the Red Sea on the Egyptian army,\nJericho, the Midianites, the Amorites, the Phillistines, the list goes on and on. How can God and\nangels be re-defined as being incapable of genocide when that's one of the main things they do?\n\nI think only a secular humanist could redefine them as gentle caretakers of precious human life\n(which is why it would be more interesting if Paul B was Christian or Jewish). I see no evidence\nthat Gene Wolfe is a secular humanist and I find it really hard to conceive that he meant\nHierogrammates to represent anything but angels. They look like angels, they act like angels\nthey are named like angels, they live in a higher, heavenly plane like angels.....\nah well. Perhaps it's just me that sees it.\n\n-bsharp" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I don't know about Paul, but I'd be more interested if we focus on the\nquestion of whether the Hierogrammates are intended to be (unfallen) angels\nby Gene Wolfe. Without my books at hand, the argument for this appears to\nbe:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "1) \"Holy\" is part of their name.\n\n2) Tzadkiel has a winged form that Severian identifies as an angel.\n\n3) Severian thinks Hierogrammates serve the Increate.\n\n4) Wolfe referred to Tzadkiel as an \"angel\" in an interview.\n\nThe argument against the Hierogrammates being angels, as I understand it, is\n\n1) Catholic theology posits that angels are perfectly moral, but the\nHierogrammates frequently engage in morally dubious if not outright evil\nbehavior.\n\n2) Hierogrammates, unlike angels, are not direct creations of God.\n\n3) Most of the arguments that Hierogrammates are angels are hearsay.\n\nI think these are both colorable arguments, but I come down on the \"not\"\nside. The Hierogrammates are obviously *spoken of *as angels, but they are\njust as obviously not two things that are *essential *to the meaning of the\nword \"angel.\">\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nKeep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety.\nhttp://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_family_safety_072008\n_______________________________________________" } ] } ] }