Lupiverse(es)

António Marques · 15 Mar 2012, 21:59 · from 2012-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: entonio at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QW50w7NuaW8gTWFycXVlcw==?=)
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 21:59:33 +0000
Subject: (urth) Lupiverse(es)
In-Reply-To: <4F626306.8070209 at gmail.com>
References: <SNT123-W51B170E1E982B63882B931CF590 at phx.gbl>
	<1331737802.36157.YahooMailNeo at web121001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<4F60CA8B.8060407 at gmail.com>
	<1331744686.23213.YahooMailNeo at web121005.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<CAGB0RZ4OB_A_tagJfoNZ4vid4iF+Mu3QL8cjKq3di3xDFA1L1g at mail.gmail.com>
	<BD0E4F6B-40FC-4081-B258-E011D29B1C15 at gmail.com>
	<CAGB0RZ7E8EE3e_kUjTQK2Q-5QiZkQRKzAFoq2+-22tuZMFbCOQ at mail.gmail.com>
	<4F626306.8070209 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4F626645.5000609 at gmail.com>

Ant?nio Marques wrote:
> Daniel Petersen wrote:
>> If some writer clearly portrays Marxism or Secular Humanism in his or
>> her work, so many readers have a tendency to praise this as clever
>> and wise and somehow morally commendable. But when a Christian
>> author does the same with their faith, well, it had at least better
>> not be too overt and should definitely be open-ended, etc.
>
> For me, the question is a different one. I see three patterns when it
> comes to an author's beliefs:
>
> - Preaching to the choir: honest but doesn't interest me, even when I'm
> part of the choir. I hear there are a number of christian writers who do
> it.
>
> - Covert preaching: dishonest *and* unintereresting because it's
> generally nearisghted and sterile. That's what I usually see 'secular'
> authors doing.
>
> - Faith/belief/worldview-inspired (emotionally and intellectually):
> that's where authors like Wolfe stand for me. Not any secularist that I
> can think of - well, I like Eco. Borges claimed to be an unbeliever, but
> he was certainly not a secularist.
>
>
> So it's not a matter of legitimacy to preach or not. I interpret the
> above as your saying 2 is considered OK by the establishment while 1 is
> only barely tolerated if it is in fact 3.

Correction: 2 is only OK if it's secularist, otherwise it's shameful, 
and 1 is only illegitimate if it's christian, otherwise it's at least 
passable.

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