{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6212", "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": 6212, "subject": "teleological principals as a dualistic paradigm", "messages": 4, "voices": 2, "first": "2012-03-31T19:25:00+00:00", "last": "2012-04-01T08:58:38+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<1333221900.55487.YahooMailClassic@web161806.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-03-31T19:25:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) teleological principals as a dualistic paradigm", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "As I was finishing up the commentary for the rather straightforward \"The Largest Luger\", I just wanted to mention exactly where I think Wright oversimplified in \"Attending Daedalus\".\n\nWolfe is that rarest of individuals as a creator: educated as an engineer who served in the military, yet likes to read mysteries, fantasies, and literary classics; he is also a spiritualist.\n\nHis mysteries are so \"detail\" oriented that they are clear reflections of his engineering background - how is this constructed? What material is it constructed of? How would that work? What physical properties would it have under these conditions? Thus the study of cause and effect and the grounding in simple physics is overwhelming in these early stories, and Wright has picked up on this teleological design scheme in New Sun.\n\nYet beyond elided cause and effect, there is the true dualism and the idea of free will that Wolfe sometimes stresses - that there is a separate and equally valid \"reality\" - possibly one free from the senses and our interaction with the physical world. Wright, I feel, ignores the equally strong strain of dualism and its implications in Wolfe's most complex creations. \n\nI think this is what makes interpreting Wolfe so very very hard at times: there is the seemingly opposite pull of a non-scientific dualism but also the insanely ordered feeling of cause and effect, sometimes reversed, inexplicable, or hiding underneath the perceptions of our narrators, that seem to be pulling in somewhat opposite directions - yet in Wolfe, they might sometimes point the same way eventually." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-03-31T22:33:59+00:00", "subject": "(urth) teleological principals as a dualistic paradigm", "in_reply_to": "<1333221900.55487.YahooMailClassic@web161806.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Extremely interesting, Marc. I just want to know what you mean more\nprecisely by two terms: 'spiritualist' and 'dualism'. The former conjurs\nin my mind the believer in contact with the dead through mediums, but I see\nin the dictionary it can also indicate more widely someone who simply\nbelieves in a spiritual reality. You mean it in this latter sense? If so,\nI assume that's also what you mean by dualism - what philosophers refer to\nas mind-body dualism: belief, essentially, in an immaterial spirit and/or\nsoul (a belief the majority of whom seem to not accept, since, to their\nreductionistic and materialistic view, it is 'non-scientific' as you say).\n I would suggest that such 'mystery' is indeed in tension with\n'rationality' in Wolfe, but that they are also in 'play', sometimes\nfruitfully, creating a larger world, making a bigger better sense of things\n(to Wolfe's way of thinking) even if also being paradoxical - a view\nperhaps both Thomistic as well as Chestertonian.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nAs I was finishing up the commentary for the rather straightforward \"The\nLargest Luger\", I just wanted to mention exactly where I think Wright\noversimplified in \"Attending Daedalus\".\n\nWolfe is that rarest of individuals as a creator: educated as an engineer\nwho served in the military, yet likes to read mysteries, fantasies, and\nliterary classics; he is also a spiritualist.\n\nHis mysteries are so \"detail\" oriented that they are clear reflections of\nhis engineering background - how is this constructed? What material is it\nconstructed of? How would that work? What physical properties would it\nhave under these conditions? Thus the study of cause and effect and the\ngrounding in simple physics is overwhelming in these early stories, and\nWright has picked up on this teleological design scheme in New Sun.\n\nYet beyond elided cause and effect, there is the true dualism and the idea\nof free will that Wolfe sometimes stresses - that there is a separate and\nequally valid \"reality\" - possibly one free from the senses and our\ninteraction with the physical world. Wright, I feel, ignores the equally\nstrong strain of dualism and its implications in Wolfe's most complex\ncreations.\n\nI think this is what makes interpreting Wolfe so very very hard at times:\nthere is the seemingly opposite pull of a non-scientific dualism but also\nthe insanely ordered feeling of cause and effect, sometimes reversed,\ninexplicable, or hiding underneath the perceptions of our narrators, that\nseem to be pulling in somewhat opposite directions - yet in Wolfe, they\nmight sometimes point the same way eventually.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1333235868.83332.YahooMailClassic@web161804.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-03-31T23:17:48+00:00", "subject": "(urth) teleological principals as a dualistic paradigm", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes Daniel, I mean spritual in the second, vague sense you refer to, and by dualism I mean the idea body and spirit are both \"real\" - and sometimes independent, sometimes operating together. \n\nThus in the tale coming up (#12), House of Ancestors, we see every human ancestor passing on something of themselves at the time of conception to the child, and an idea that the things we do in life can have a real and lasting effect on the physical world even down to inheritence, something that is not normally, as you say, scientific. Wolfe approaches spiritual things with a categorizing and scientific mindset, and it is, I think, unusual.\n\n--- On Sat, 3/31/12, Daniel Petersen wrote:\n\n\nFrom: Daniel Petersen \nSubject: Re: (urth) teleological principals as a dualistic paradigm\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Saturday, March 31, 2012, 3:33 PM\n\n\nExtremely interesting, Marc. “I just want to know what you mean more precisely by two terms: ?'spiritualist' and 'dualism'. ?The former conjurs in my mind the believer in contact with the dead through mediums, but I see in the dictionary it can also indicate more widely someone who simply believes in a spiritual reality. ?You mean it in this latter sense” ?If so, I assume that's also what you mean by dualism - what philosophers refer to as mind-body dualism: ?belief, essentially, in an immaterial spirit and/or soul (a belief the majority of whom seem to not accept, since, to their reductionistic and materialistic view, it is 'non-scientific' as you say). ?I would suggest that such 'mystery' is indeed in tension with 'rationality' in Wolfe, but that they are also in 'play', sometimes fruitfully, creating a larger world, making a bigger better sense of things (to Wolfe's way of thinking) even if also being paradoxical - a view perhaps both Thomistic\n as well as Chestertonian.\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n\nOn Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\nAs I was finishing up the commentary for the rather straightforward \"The Largest Luger\", I just wanted to mention exactly where I think Wright oversimplified in \"Attending Daedalus\".\n\nWolfe is that rarest of individuals as a creator: educated as an engineer who served in the military, yet likes to read mysteries, fantasies, and literary classics; he is also a spiritualist.\n\nHis mysteries are so \"detail\" oriented that they are clear reflections of his engineering background - how is this constructed? “What material is it constructed of” “How would that work” “What physical properties would it have under these conditions” ?Thus the study of cause and effect and the grounding in simple physics is overwhelming in these early stories, and Wright has picked up on this teleological design scheme in New Sun.\n\nYet beyond elided cause and effect, there is the true dualism and the idea of free will that Wolfe sometimes stresses - that there is a separate and equally valid \"reality\" - possibly one free from the senses and our interaction with the physical world. ?Wright, I feel, ignores the equally strong strain of dualism and its implications in Wolfe's most complex creations.\n\nI think this is what makes interpreting Wolfe so very very hard at times: there is the seemingly opposite pull of a non-scientific dualism but also the insanely ordered feeling of cause and effect, sometimes reversed, inexplicable, or hiding underneath the perceptions of our narrators, that seem to be pulling in somewhat opposite directions - yet in Wolfe, they might sometimes point the same way eventually.\n\n\n-----Inline Attachment Follows-----" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-04-01T08:58:38+00:00", "subject": "(urth) teleological principals as a dualistic paradigm", "in_reply_to": "<1333235868.83332.YahooMailClassic@web161804.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wolfe approaches spiritual things with a categorizing and scientific\nmindset, and it is, I think, unusual.\n\nYeah, maybe it's unusual in some circles, but I find it quite common\namongst many thinking people I read and dialogue with. E.g. philosophers\nof religion, theologians, and other sorts of 'professional' or 'habitual'\nthinkers: it's at least as old as Aquinas (and the church fathers before\nhim) and is popular in someone like C. S. Lewis. But a sizeable segment of\ncontemporary philosophers think this way about religion and there is tome\nafter tome devoted to it. 'Biblical studies' in theology departments are\nalso chock full of this combo of scientific, 'categorical' sort of thinking\nabout spiritual mysteries.\n\nWolfe I think is especially adept at giving fleshy realism to both aspects\nin artistically dancing tension and play. You don't usually feel as if one\nis 'lording it over' the other. To me, giving that realism to a scientific\nsort of perspective is rather common in contemporary fiction. So I find\nhis enfleshing verisimilitude about the mysterious spiritual aspect to be\nthe more rare and astonishing.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nYes Daniel, I mean spritual in the second, vague sense you refer to, and\nby dualism I mean the idea body and spirit are both \"real\" - and sometimes\nindependent, sometimes operating together.\n\nThus in the tale coming up (#12), House of Ancestors, we see every human\nancestor passing on something of themselves at the time of conception to\nthe child, and an idea that the things we do in life can have a real and\nlasting effect on the physical world even down to inheritence, something\nthat is not normally, as you say, scientific. Wolfe approaches spiritual\nthings with a categorizing and scientific mindset, and it is, I think,\nunusual.\n\n--- On *Sat, 3/31/12, Daniel Petersen *wrote:\n\n\nFrom: Daniel Petersen \nSubject: Re: (urth) teleological principals as a dualistic paradigm\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Saturday, March 31, 2012, 3:33 PM\n\nExtremely interesting, Marc. I just want to know what you mean more\nprecisely by two terms: 'spiritualist' and 'dualism'. The former conjurs\nin my mind the believer in contact with the dead through mediums, but I see\nin the dictionary it can also indicate more widely someone who simply\nbelieves in a spiritual reality. You mean it in this latter sense? If so,\nI assume that's also what you mean by dualism - what philosophers refer to\nas mind-body dualism: belief, essentially, in an immaterial spirit and/or\nsoul (a belief the majority of whom seem to not accept, since, to their\nreductionistic and materialistic view, it is 'non-scientific' as you say).\n I would suggest that such 'mystery' is indeed in tension with\n'rationality' in Wolfe, but that they are also in 'play', sometimes\nfruitfully, creating a larger world, making a bigger better sense of things\n(to Wolfe's way of thinking) even if also being paradoxical - a view\nperhaps both Thomistic as well as Chestertonian.\n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:\n\nAs I was finishing up the commentary for the rather straightforward \"The\nLargest Luger\", I just wanted to mention exactly where I think Wright\noversimplified in \"Attending Daedalus\".\n\nWolfe is that rarest of individuals as a creator: educated as an engineer\nwho served in the military, yet likes to read mysteries, fantasies, and\nliterary classics; he is also a spiritualist.\n\nHis mysteries are so \"detail\" oriented that they are clear reflections of\nhis engineering background - how is this constructed? What material is it\nconstructed of? How would that work? What physical properties would it\nhave under these conditions? Thus the study of cause and effect and the\ngrounding in simple physics is overwhelming in these early stories, and\nWright has picked up on this teleological design scheme in New Sun.\n\nYet beyond elided cause and effect, there is the true dualism and the idea\nof free will that Wolfe sometimes stresses - that there is a separate and\nequally valid \"reality\" - possibly one free from the senses and our\ninteraction with the physical world. Wright, I feel, ignores the equally\nstrong strain of dualism and its implications in Wolfe's most complex\ncreations.\n\nI think this is what makes interpreting Wolfe so very very hard at times:\nthere is the seemingly opposite pull of a non-scientific dualism but also\nthe insanely ordered feeling of cause and effect, sometimes reversed,\ninexplicable, or hiding underneath the perceptions of our narrators, that\nseem to be pulling in somewhat opposite directions - yet in Wolfe, they\nmight sometimes point the same way eventually.\n_______________________________________________" } ] } ] }