(urth) Dionysus, the Mausoleum

[Son of Witz]

Lee, Gerry's point is valid. There IS a better description of the elephant.
He does NOT put himself in the shoes of this "Sighted Man".

I see it more like:

Lee: (holding the tail) "This tail is far out, I think this must be a Hermaphrodon, the beast with both genders!"
And, Gerry, who has made an exhaustive search up that leg says, "no, no no, I've got a firm GRASP on this beast's sex. It is NOT a Hermaphrodon."

None of us has the whole map, but if we share and dispute, we might come to an accurate description of the Elephant in the Book.

~Witz

On Dec 21, 2010, at 9:19 AM, Lee Berman <severiansola at hotmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
>> What I think we have is like the parable of the elephant and the six blind men describing it 
>> by parts (it's like a "hose", "spear", "fan",  "wall" "tree trunk","rope").
> 
> 
>> Gerry Quinn- If we are to take the parable seriously, there *is* a good description "an 
>> elephant" which reconciles these varying partial explanations.
> 
> No, you miss the point of the analogy here. There is only a "good" description of the
> entirety of the elephant if there is a sighted man present. Each blind man "sees" with
> his hands and can never "see" the entirety of something as large as an elephant. A sighted
> man can step back and see the whole animal.
> 
> Gerry, by setting yourself up as a valid judge of rightness or validity, you are suggesting
> you are the only sighted man in a roomful of blind guys and their theories. Are you Gene Wolfe?
> 
> If we are attempting to discern Gene Wolfe's intentions (as I am) I would say only Gene Wolfe can
> be said to be a sighted man, and he ain't talking (much). So, seriously Gerry, are you him?
> 
> If we are all not-Gene Wolfe here I think we are all equally blind men and our only hope is to
> rely on each other. I see every other contributor here as sane, intelligent and familiar with 
> Gene Wolfe. If I tell them their ideas are wrong I'm suggesting they are either stupid, unfamiliar
> with Wolfe or mentally ill.
> 
> I am suggesting that if you have made a detailed study of the elephant's leg and know each wrinkle, hair
> and toenail, I'm not going to dismiss your ideas because they don't fit in with my study of the trunk. I
> think we should all admit that none of us have the capacity to grasp the elephant as a whole.
> 
> I am also hesitant to dismiss the loon who is wandering about, not even touching the elephant. His discovery 
> of gaps in the nearby foliage might make his "hedge trimmer" theory at least as relevant to understand the
> elephant as the theory of the guy studying the tail.
> 
>                           
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net