6.6 KiB
Explaining other universes ("... Hence rationalist fanfiction.")
-
Author: u/PeridexisErrant put aside fear for courage, and death for life*
-
Score: 15
-
Created: 2014-12-03T07:53:24
Post:
Comments:
u/Kodix [+12] (3 hours later)
Wait. That's the actual Potter family motto in canon Harry Potter?
Well damn that does fit like a glove. Previously I did indeed feel it was pretty.. "icky", if somewhat plausible. Knowing that it was there before MoR does make it much better.
u/qznc [+6] Chaos Legion (5 hours later)
It is not necessarily the "family motto", but it definitely was is inscription on Harry's parents grave in canon. From what I found online the Potter family has a coat of arms, but no motto.
u/alexanderwales [+6] Time flies like an arrow (7 hours later)
It's a passage from the Bible, 1 Corinthians 15:26.
u/CopperZirconium [+3] (14 hours later)
I didn't like it in canon either. A christian epithet on a wizard grave stone didn't fit for me.
u/None [+6] (6 hours later)
Can you imagine how loudly people would have screamed “Plot device!” and “Oh, come on, that is way too convenient!” and “That isn’t right at all, transhumanism isn’t something you get from your parents, it’s not something you inherit like a royal bloodline, it’s a decision we make for ourselves!”
Wait. I did scream that. I actually had not known this was the Potter family motto in canon, and in canon, it's a fucking terrible family motto, because it turns the whole thing into Harry Is Jesus In Purgatory. That freaking quote refers to Christ conquering capital-D everyone-goes-to-hell Theological!Death by sacrificing Himself on the fucking Cross!
u/embrodski [+1] (9 hours later)
Oooooh, this is fascinating! Am I correct in guessing you were raised Catholic? I was raised in an apocalyptic protestant sect (Jehovah's Witnesses) so they taught the Christ-conquers-Actual!Death interpretation (with the caveat that he's gonna do it in the 20th century, not the 1st). I am curious if you still consider the everyone-goes-to-hell-Theological!Death interpretation more plausible than the Christ-conquers-Actual!Death interpretation, now that you've (I assume) exited the religion.
As a related question, but not directly pertinent to the previous question, do you think the original 1st Century Christians held to the Actual!Death or Theological!Death interpretation, and do you think that matters?
u/None [+6] (22 hours later)
Am I correct in guessing you were raised Catholic?
Not in the slightest. I was raised Jewish. But I did go to university in a state full of Catholics, and am engaged to one.
I was raised in an apocalyptic protestant sect (Jehovah's Witnesses) so they taught the Christ-conquers-Actual!Death interpretation (with the caveat that he's gonna do it in the 20th century, not the 1st). I am curious if you still consider the everyone-goes-to-hell-Theological!Death interpretation more plausible than the Christ-conquers-Actual!Death interpretation, now that you've (I assume) exited the religion.
Honestly, I just want to thank the Church for inventing the Responsory Libera Me, which thus gave the world the song they play when you really are defeating death.
u/CopperZirconium [+2] (13 hours later)
Mormonism holds that it is Actual!Death that is defeated. In the Second Coming of Christ "death will loose it's hold" and everyone will be resurrected. Death isn't a personification, it is a state that won't exist anymore.
u/PeridexisErrant [+2] put aside fear for courage, and death for life (23 hours later)
do you think the original 1st Century Christians held to the Actual!Death or Theological!Death interpretation, and do you think that matters?
A simple reading (supported by the untranslated text and context) was that they were talking about actual, tangible, bodily resurrection and expected it within decades. This was a common end-times trope at that point, so Jesus coming back was a pretty clear sign that the end was nigh.
Does it matter? On one hand, it's crucial to an accurate reading of the text. On the other, presumably there's a justification ready either way and it has been a very long time.
u/MugaSofer [+1] (4 days later)
That freaking quote refers to Christ conquering capital-D everyone-goes-to-hell Theological!Death by sacrificing Himself on the fucking Cross!
It doesn't, actually. It's in the middle of a defence of the physical resurrection of the dead at the End of Days. Nothing to do with Hell.
u/Putnam3145 [+3] (22 hours later)
Hehe, I'm actually sort of attempting this right now with my own Dwarf Fortress mod.
It's a Homestuck mod that's been cobbled together over the years with nary a thought towards meta-world building. The story was supposed to be a standard somewhat silly CYOA, but then one of my first traveling companions had an analytical ability of over 3500 (where 1000 is average and the top percentile of humans is 2000) and a memory of 5000 (which is perfect memory in DF terms, so she remembers everything), so I ended up having to think about stuff because I felt like someone that smart combined with two intensely curious traveling companions means that stuff has to be questioned, analyzed etc.
So it's sort of odd. Contrivances in-story actually come from the game, or at least how the game should be working at the time, so explaining that ends up seeming kinda off-the-wall, but the fact that the game does it makes it better. But I made the mod that way, even though I didn't do it while planning to write this story. This piece says that "There are authorial decisions that you cannot make yourself and that only another author can make for you", yet here I am making a story that relies on the constraints of something I made, using storytelling strategies that I would not use if the game weren't telling me that that ought to be happening.
u/Transfuturist [+1] Carthago delenda est. (4 days later)
This would be a prime example of the buzzword 'emergence.'