From: Alex Ferguson (alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk)
Date: Tue 10 May 1994 - 21:29:28 EEST
John H:
> I was a bit cheeky with this, because what the GLs really believed
> is a BIG SECRET, and all we can have are our own opinions.
I think what they believed is mostly evident, or at least susceptible to inference, guesswork, and defamation. What was exact the big secret is, of course, part of the secret.
> I would classify the GLs as SCIENTISTIC rather than scientific in
> their thinking. They were deductionists rather than inductionists,
> and, practiced a pseudo-science because they never appreciated or
> tested the limits of Falsification.
> The effects of their experiments (i.e Goddess Switch),
> also seem to indicate they were unable to predict the outcome of
> their experiments or modify their models
That's a bit rough. The Goddess Switch is really a "reasonable" example of scientific experiment:- Theorem: these two Goddess are the same, or at least so similar as to be interchangeable; Experiment: switch 'em; Observation: watch what happens; Prediction: nothing; Falsifying result: that which promotes growth hits fan.
Compared, to say, earthly mythography or biological taxonomy, this is a veritable model of the scientific method. Now, from the pov of the people being experimented on, this makes them better classified as Complete Barstewards.
> - a failing which led to the Eight New Manifestations.
Who they?
> Their greatest successes were with the
> anti-chaos pantheons, but their principles/models made little
> headway with draconic, Pamaltean, Grower, Maker or Hsunchen
> myth worlds.
Draconic I'll give you (but note they had a wild time among the human dragon worshippers of the east), but I disagree elsewhere. The Hykim and Mikyh writeup is GLism run riot. Dozens of cults described in a page and a half, and all shoehorned into the same format for the rune magic? I bet someone made tenured professor with a fat research grant on the strength of _that_.
> Perhaps most tellingly, I think Greg's attitude to the GLs comes
> pretty directly from Joseph Campbell, and is intended as a lesson in
> what happens if you try to manipulate myths scientistically rather
> than from an involved cultural perspective.
Yah. But I think Greg's own attitude has changed: things that we were blithely spoon-fed as being true before now stand condemned as God Learner monomyth artifacts/RQ2 2nd-ageist bludners.
Alex.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:34:14 EEST