to: everyone

[restingstitchface]

Everyone. There has been nothing convenient about entertaining a few of our divine friends these past months. At this point, I believe some of them meddle in our lives on purpose. But you know how these beings are. Loving, violent and above all selfish. But their conduct should never be mistaken as good or bad.

Do you want the opinion of a professional? It’s human.

Of course, when I examine our delusions about being divine, and remember my mortal origins, it motivates me to question where they come from.

Were they once human like us?

In any case, I would like to remind you that your memories will take you by surprise. Not today. Nor tomorrow. But someday you will recall more about who you were, and perhaps find you cannot stand it. And whether that happens today or tomorrow, take a seat and have a drink, and try not to take yourself too seriously.

Comments

[stations]

It does kind of become inherently problematic, if you think about it. It excludes other sentient species from personhood, for starters, but I think Dr. Crane was using it in more like a broad, catch-all descriptive way meaning empathetic, curious, capable of a broad range of emotions and interests, simultaneously selfish and benevolent, and all the other abstract things we attribute to the concept of having a soul. In that case, it's still problematic because it kind of implies anything that isn't human doesn't have those things.

It's just an interesting case of a word being antiquated and insufficient for its use. We should come up with something new. We have a pretty nice opportunity to invent a cool word.

[ancunin]

Oh, I understand what he meant. I just don't care for it, for precisely those reasons.

In any case, I feel almost sorry for you all, coming from these dreary realms with only other humans to speak and interact with.

[ He does not, in fact, have a suggestion for a better word. ]

[stations]

Oh, I don't know about Dr. Crane, but I come from a world with a bunch of other things that aren't human.

Granted, at least half of them tend to want to eat us, and most of the other half want to like peel off our skin or steal our bodies or something, but... some of the rest of them are cool. Sometimes.

[ancunin]

Now you're practically making me homesick.

[stations]

Hey, we have something in common. Cool :)

I mean, not cool about the skin peeling part, but. You know.

[tedandroses]

Not that I'm against a cool word (schyooman? blorbo? zangle! sorry). Fucking LOVE a cool new word. But "people" seems like it could maybe function also just saying?

Also problematic because it implies anything that doesn't have those things aren't human. Not all humans do have a broad range of emotions and interests. Or empathy, etc etc

Anthropocentrism! Sorry, I was trying to think of the word the whole time. We do it with intelligence as well. The animals we consider the most intelligent are the ones we can make do things for us, or that learn our languages. Selfish, but also, how do we know some animals don't just ignore intelligence tests because they're boring, or because it's bizarre to them. We don't. And why wouldn't they? If someone took me from my friends and put me in a room alone with some food or the exit behind a bunch of puzzles, I'd reckon they were going to murder me.

We're pretty historically terrible at learning and respecting even intercultural differences. So yeah...I can imagine on worlds where there are several dominant species, the humans aren't falling all over themselves to be respectful and curious.

[stations]

People could work, I guess, but it feels weird if you're trying to say something along the lines of, "There was something so inherently People about their motivation".

And you're right, not all humans are capable of empathy. When we go to describe people who are, like, sociopathic mass-murderers, we call them things like "inhumane", which is kind of circling right back around to anthropocentrism again.

I don't think I'm sold on schyooman, blorbo, or zangle. No offense.

[tedandroses]

None taken. Wouldn't've apologized for good suggestions.

Mm, yeah, no, you're right, the grammar isn't ...there. Or like you're translating a different word. A little Speaker For the Dead, weirdly?. (You ever read those? I don't remember what book you had out when I wandered in the other time but I FEEL like the vibes overlap with the first one at least. It's basically Training In VR To Fight Invading Space Insects. Good, though. And the author sucks in a political way, but these days that's like saying "it's sci fi/fantasy", fuck.)

Exactly. Or, even if you dial it down to less...murdery. Even if we don't call the sociopathic mass murderers inhumane (which -- mass murder is pretty human, given our track record), there's this idea of empathy as necessary to not turn someone into a dead-eyed killer. But...there are like twenty kinds of empathy, and that's just what I remember from Behavioral Psych. There's a complete difference between picking up on the implication of someone else's body language; recognizing or being concerned or even distraught when other people are in pain; and, you know, ...whether or not you cry at Boromir's death or have strong feelings about E.T. People are sometimes -- I would say even a LOT of people are good at one part and shitty at another, and that doesn't make them creepy or broken or something other than human.

And everything works like that eventually, doesn't it? Curiosity, intelligence... We could just say humans are bipeds with certain kinds of chromosomes and I've already left out anyone who has an atypical chromosomal structure or was born with only one leg.

And like, I get "in general"/"most of the time" etc. I just think...better to have too many people in the in-group than start making cuts, I guess. Who are we to decide that.

So. Yes. Right. Uh. That was a lot more than I meant to ...think at you.

...What would you propose we call the Vast Multitudes of Sentience? Since we both, at least, agree that linguistic evolution is cool. And that leaving people out isn't.

[stations]

I've never read Speaker for the Dead, do you have a copy? I'm always desperate for new books. If you remember it well enough, you can manifest them in the Horizon. I'll pay you fake money for it — frankly, I'll pay you fake money for ANY books you can conjure up and let me borrow. I'm usually stuck cycling back through things I've already read before. Thorne isn't big on fiction, and as you can imagine, the ones that do exist are almost always in the high fantasy genre. Not usually my preference.

(Boromir was an asshole, nobody should cry for him. If that makes me lacking in empathy, then I'm willing to accept it.

I did cry at the end of Terminator when they lowered Arnold Schwarzenegger into the molten lava pit, though.)

I'm still workshopping the new word. I'll get back to you.

Can I be completely honest with you about something?
Trying to keep up with you is sometimes a lot like trying to keep up with Johnny Truant halfway through a Zampanò footnote.

[tedandroses]

I read the first four a...whole bunch, so I'm pretty sure I can conjure them up, if they're not already sitting in one of the stacks of books I sort of plunked into my bedroom when I was making it because they felt like the ones that should be there.

And if I don't remember every word, you'll never know! I'll bring Ender's Game too; that's the first one in the series. You don't really have to read it to understand Speaker -- 2, 3 and 4 are slightly more adult-aimed and there's also a time jump? -- but experiencing what happens to Ender rather than just hearing it vaguely referenced was important for me, at least, I think.

There are definitely other books I can bring! Anything else you want besides sci fi?
Oh! What if instead of Monopoly money that I hand you back for Neverfood, we swap books? I do reread things, but...man, I'm dying for a bookstore or a good rec. I'd take a textbook.

(Wait. High fantasy for Thorne, or high fantasy for--- THAT WAS A JOKE, WASN'T IT.)

I haven't ever seen all of Terminator? (I know.) So can't judge you either way on that but I'm, uh. Sure it was very moving.

Oh, you push the new word idea and now you're workshopping. Hm.

...Jesus Christ. Well! Thank you very much for your honesty! I'll just be going to re-evaluate all my life choices now.

(No, yeah. I...ramble. I reference. I jump backwards for context. I know this, I'm sorry. It's a thing I'm working on: trying to be a little more concise and choose my words well. It's a little better aloud and not thinking?

...and...hopefully the rambling is, in fact, what you mean, and less "you come off like someone spiraling into obsessive, manic psychosis who's kind of a dick".)

I do actually appreciate you being up front with me, though. Also slightly flattered that you presumed I would understand the reference...? But I'll try to work on being a little...not so much.

Though I will remind you I made friends with Jerry almost immediately upon arriving here, so...well, I think I was trying to imply "you should have known" there, but it also seems like you may just be friend-shaped to People Who Are Kind Of A Lot.

[stations]

Everything, to be honest. Anything. All the books. I don't think I can accurately convey how much I read, and whatever amount you're thinking is definitely an underestimation, so... please. Every book. All of them.

I'm totally down to book swap, too. I've got so many on tap.


It was definitely the rambling thing, by the way, and not the obsessive manic psychosis part. Just, for the record. Although, I mean, I don't know you THAT well, maybe you are, but that wouldn't be any of my business.


God... you might be right.
People Who Are Kind Of A Lot.
It explains... so much.

( trAVIS )