God Learner Lies

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: G. Fried (address.removed@nowhere.tld)
Date: Mon 25 Apr 1994 - 12:23:05 EEST


G. Fried here.

I'd like to jump in on a theme being batted around by David and Bryan and others: God Learnerism.

It seems to me that we need to develop some more distinctions in how we classify the various ways which Gloranthans (and we!) attempt to make theoretical sense out the multiplicity of the Gods. Trouble is, I'm not at all sure how to do this! (And the dearth of published material on the GLs doesn't help.) But it does seem to me to be unfair to brand ALL thinking which abstracts the nature of the gods as God Learnerism.

The God Learners went to the utmost extreme in abstracting the nature of the gods philosophically, and they did this (I gather from the existing propaganda about them!) in order to exploit ruthlessly the mythological 'nature' of Glorantha. In their arrogance, the God Learners did as much damage to the mythic ecology of Glorantha as we are doing to the natural ecology of our world. So the GLs got swatted. (And we'll get ours, too, I imagine.)

But surely not ALL Gloranthans who try to think philosophically about the gods are God Learners! (Famous last words! -- not every paranoid mob is going to pay much attention to the nuance of this distinction!) Otherwise all the great work of HeroQuesting would not be possible -- and I mean 'great' like Arkat's: making connections at a very high level in the mythic fabric of Glorantha, not to exploit her, but to heal and preserve her. So I would say that one distiction to be made is that between (in Stephen Martin's words) the "God Learner mindset" which cannot "see the many differences between Gloranthan cultures" and seeks only to exploit them, and the Arkati attitude of "no experimentation without respect". The "respect" is the recognition of the importance of cultic specificity to the mythic life-cycle of Glorantha; but the "experimentation" at the same time demands the ability to abstract from that specificity in HeroQuesting to preserve it BY changing it. [I think I may have even lost myself....]

As David Dunham pointed out, this kind of distinction is at least what the Lunars would CLAIM underlies their saying that Yanfal Tarnils is the healed Humakt. (Um, David, I think the locals are getting the tar and feathers ready....) Surely MANY Gloranthans argue this way about their gods without being God Learners. Surely _something_ like this kind of argumentation took place (TAKES place) in the Yelmalio/Elmal schism....

Here's an analogy: there's got to be a distinction between those who use science and technology to rape and plunder the Earth and those who think science can be used to heal, preserve and live in harmony with the Earth. Just because you use the abstractions of science doesn't mean you don't care about the specificity of THIS landscape or THAT member of a turtle species which you are studying. Both the GLs and an Arkati HQer make use of abstractions about the nature of Glorantha (though the Gloranthan abstractions are about mythic 'atoms', not physical ones -- thus the GL's 'secret' and their RuneSight). The difference is then what USE they put these abstractions to and the WAY they do it.

David hit the nail on the head again when he cites the Romans calling the Celtic war gods Ares/Mars. They absorbed the whole Greek pantheon this way. (Hm... maybe the Romans WERE God Learners!) The Greek historian Herodotus was fascinated by the question of making sense of all the weird gods of the barbarians in this way. Ra is the Greek Helios, etc.

Another issue: the "unreachable" Arachne Solara -- Someone brought this up. At the RQCon I asked GS one of my several questions for a buck: Can A S receive cultic worship? No was the answer.

But what about this: on page 78 of the "Elder Races Book" of _Elder Secrets_ it says:

"All beast men worship Arachne Solara, creator of the universe."

And on p. 80, on centaurs (and what a lovely illo on that page, too!):

"Nature religion dominates, with worship of Arachne Solara as Goddess
of Nature practised in winter....."

Too bad Sandy has signed off, cause he and GS were the authors of this book, and they were both there for the $-a-question session. I find these passages pretty weird, especially considering that the beastmen are about the most unnatural critters around, being the results of EWF experiments! (Talk about experimentation without respect!) But it says the beasties worship A S as a nature goddess. What do they get in return for their cult practice? Or is this religion simply mystical meditation, with no manifest 'usefulness' to them powergaming beastfolk?

Finally, I second Henk's motion regarding massively volitile RW topics. I too have a great interest in these questions, but please folks, try not to let your passions get away with you. Common sense should suffice to preserve OUR little net-lozenge from the incursions of RW Chaos! (Henk, does this cast you in the role of the RQDaily's Urox?!)

Enough from me!

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:33:56 EEST