Silk's origin

David Stockhoff · 12 Oct 2011, 21:55 · from 2011-October.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: dstockhoff at verizon.net (David Stockhoff)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:55:51 -0400
Subject: (urth) Silk's origin
In-Reply-To: <D796CFC2633343E1AD71A6C06C69EA73@Rover>
References: <CAM3O41KTbA6w=DGP0=PKOWeYCJqCnnzQHpMmR2DQn=qn9H8dRA at mail.gmail.com><4E9373A2.1050707 at gmail.com><4E939403.8080007 at verizon.net><4E93B5F8.3020306 at gmail.com><4E94487E.10501 at verizon.net><D68FAB30D7F440BB9095BD357CAB55A4@Rover><4E945874.9090301 at gmail.com><4E945C2F.7080905 at verizon.net><4E948295.5010500 at gmail.com><571E68DA15DD499F97AF81E00288D79F@Rover><4E95A772.50808 at verizon.net>
	<606577368B424519B0072050D478DF88@Rover><4E95B2F8.7060009 at verizon.net>
	<4E95EEF4.9040707 at gmail.com><4E95F100.6060004 at verizon.net>
	<4E95F74E.8030407 at gmail.com> <4E95FF22.1050805 at verizon.net>
	<D796CFC2633343E1AD71A6C06C69EA73@Rover>
Message-ID: <4E960CE7.9060207 at verizon.net>

On 10/12/2011 5:32 PM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
>
> *From:* David Stockhoff <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net>
> > On 10/12/2011 4:23 PM, James Wynn wrote:
>
> > > Well, just sharing selected genes would not really make Silk a 
> "son of
> > > Typhon". That would be true of any cousin of Typhon or any chimpanzee
> > > (as Gerry pointed out).
>
> > I have to remind myself sometimes that I am addressing a bunch of
> > engineers. :D
>
> > (1) Is percentage of shared genes the only way to compare species?
> > Obviously not.
> > (2) If chimps and humans are 99% the same, then that pretty much kills
> > that usefulness of that viewpoint. Further, most of the 99% is junk,
> > rendering the figure meaningless. Is there a biologist in the house?
> But isn?t it you who is promulgating the view that the shared genes 
> are significant?
err ... they are significant for a reason other than mere quantity.
>
> > (3) If God walked the earth 10 generations ago, and I had some of His
> > genes spliced in so that I could throw thunderbolts, you can be damn
> > sure I'd call myself the Son of God and throw thunderbolts at you if 
> you
> > gave a peep. And so would you. "Cousin" would not do it.
> Leadership skills are not a special ability distinct from the 
> abilities of the human race in general, as the ability to shoot 
> thunderbolts would be.
There are many reasons a man can be called the son of a man who is not 
his father. There are many things a man can inherit from a man who is 
not his father.
> When we attach significance to someone being related to another 
> person, we are talking about large constellations of genes. If 
> somebody has Typhon?s nose, and we suspect he is related to Typhon, we 
> take account of it because we imagine he may have many characteristics 
> of Typhon, not just the nose. If we knew that Typhon was so proud of 
> his nose that he had his nose-shape genes injected into countless 
> embryos, the matter would be much less interesting ? just a nose 
> shape, not Typhon?s nose-shape.
We are not talking about noses. I said that quite clearly here:
>
> > Point being, Silk has some of Typhon's superiority, if we accept this
> > theory. Naturally, if you don't think Typhon is in any way superior,
> > this doesn't work so well---you would indeed be talking about mundane
> > traits.
> Leadership is not quite as mundane as blond hair, but it is not that 
> rare. Indeed, I?d expect that if if indeed there are ponderable genes 
> for leadership ? a questionable matter given that it must depend 
> strongly on nurture as well as nature ? there are multiple gene 
> complexes, and Typhon?s technicians would probably have used different 
> combinations in different embryos.
Leadership shmeadership. Silk is so much more. For example, Crane 
observes that he heals remarkably quickly. Silk is a minor superman with 
a combination of superior traits. Perhaps leadership is his best 
characteristic, but you could also argue that it's his morality. Is 
there a gene for that? Who knows? Who cares? Maybe Wolfe pretends there 
is for this story. Maybe the Outsider took a Superman and made him a 
Good Superman. If that's the story, that's the story.

Wolfe is not a gene scientist---he's a writer.
> > > 2) Why, when asked about Silk's "ancestry" did Wolfe say "he was the
> > > son of the Calde and his mistress"? His ancestry would move a step
> > > back beyond Typhon.
> > Ah, well. Some things are inexplicable.
> Maybe Wolfe was just indicating that Silk?s genetic parents are 
> basically irrelevant to the story.
Possibly. Or he was stating Silk's legal or socially defined paternity, 
or how he saw himself. There so many answers.


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 111012-1, 10/12/2011
Tested on: 10/12/2011 5:55:52 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
http://www.avast.com

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