# Adam's Secret Theory *The Whorl list — 3 messages, 3 voices, 24 Apr 2001* > 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. --- ### David Lebling *24 Apr 2001, 10:02* < Subject: Yet another Secret theory: we have met the enemy and he is us>> But how does your theory square with "a weapon too heavy to wield"? Unless the meaning is that becoming good is too hard for the Neighbors, and for humans. This makes a certain amount of sense, and captures the idea of a "heavy" weapon. If I have a sword that weighs fifty pounds, I can't swing it at my enemy, even though I know it would destroy him if I could. We've gone around and around on the "Golden Rule" theory (I think I was one of the early proposers of it, if not the first), but it still isn't very satisfying, even though it's the best we've got so far. Foolish inhumi, to be worried that humans might become good! Dave Lebling aka vizcacha *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Adam Stephanides *24 Apr 2001, 09:31 · follows David Lebling* > on 4/24/01 9:02 AM, David Lebling at dlebling at ucentric.com wrote: > < > Subject: Yet another Secret theory: we have met the enemy and he is us>> > > But how does your theory square with "a weapon too heavy to wield"? Unless > the meaning is that becoming good is too hard for the Neighbors, and for > humans. Right. --Adam *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Michael Straight *24 Apr 2001, 11:03 · follows Adam Stephanides* > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, David Lebling wrote: > < > Subject: Yet another Secret theory: we have met the enemy and he is us>> > > But how does your theory square with "a weapon too heavy to wield"? Unless > the meaning is that becoming good is too hard for the Neighbors, and for > humans. This makes a certain amount of sense, and captures the idea of a > "heavy" weapon. If I have a sword that weighs fifty pounds, I can't swing it > at my enemy, even though I know it would destroy him if I could. A sword is obviously a weapon, even if it's a sword so big no one could actually use it. But a fact about the inhumi would only be called a weapon if someone were to say, "Ah! This information could be used to hurt the inhumi!" But if the information could obviously never be used to hurt the inhumi, then why would Horn or anyone else call it a weapon in the first place? -Rostrum *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. ---