Babbie

John Watkins · 19 Mar 2009, 19:06 · from 2009-March.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: john.watkins04 at gmail.com (John Watkins)
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:06:16 -0400
Subject: (urth) Babbie
In-Reply-To: <1f7617370903191159h66ea296eh9d2dfb66d953ed9c at mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.9034.1237486590.18432.urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net>
	<49C2946D.1060607 at verizon.net>
	<1f7617370903191159h66ea296eh9d2dfb66d953ed9c at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <93d4039f0903191206w785a21baj9e28d231fdf5619 at mail.gmail.com>

I just remember another passage where Wolfe seems to explicitly endorse a
Thomistic theory of the soul...it's in Urth of the New Sun when Severian is
talking with the Hierodules about his various iterations.  One of the
simplest ways of explaining it is to use the analogy of writing or music.  A
song ("Let it Be," for example) is neither a particular performance of the
song nor the music and lyrics in their abstract--the former is like a body
and the latter is like a soul.  Every time the soul (the music and lyrics)
are instantiated in a performance, then the song exists, but it is always
the same song as long as it is the same music and lyrics.

I believe a similar example is used to explain to Severian how he can be in
two places at once, and how, if he and another Sev get too close together,
they'll blend into one guy.

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>wrote:

> David,
>
> I think you're on the right track. However, I don't suppose Wolfe is
> proposing any
> specific answer to the question of what a soul is, let alone whether it can
> be
> copied or not. Rather, I suggest that he's asking questions: "What if
> _this_ were
> possible; then where would the soul be?" and some of his novels are, among
> other things, attempts to explore those questions, though not necessarily
> to
> _answer_ them as such.
>
> The best fiction raises questions but doesn't necessarily answer them.
>
> --
> Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
>  _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20090319/f03c42a6/attachment.htm>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net