(urth) S&S vs. SF in BotNS

[Gerry Quinn]

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes 
> Gerry Quinn wrote:

> > I don’t think Wolfe talks much about souls as such.  I’m not sure we can
> > flatly state that he is postulating that they are an entirely separate thing
> > from the mind and its connection to the universe.

> ...but I think that talking about Lupine fiction, and _especially_ the
> Briah cycle, without seeing souls everywhere, is akin to Dr. Crane's
> explanation of Silk's enlightenment as a cerebral accident. It is
> self-contained and in its way complete, but it misses the point. To
> insist that everything be "scientifically" explicable is reasonable;
> to say that this is the true explanation is to cut oneself off from
> entire layers of meaning.
> 
> And the sad thing is that Crane cannot even conceive of what he is
> cutting himself off from. Is that true of you also?
I don’t think *everything* has to be scientifically explicable.  Silk’s enlightenment seems to be, in essence, a kind of miracle.
What I’m not convinced by is your particular dualistic understanding of the soul; I’m not sure what it adds to the story.  I’m content to leave the concept of the soul as a little mysterious.  Perhaps that makes me in your mind like Crane.
- Gerry Quinn

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20111222/d8162bdc/attachment-0004.htm>