→Seol 26: It's not coming along

[seol_plumfall]

It is a convention of language to refer to the Light as loving, punishing, forgiving, or scorning, but evidence seems to suggest -- and theologians have already argued -- that such expressions are creatively anthropomorphic. It is a popular opinion within the Church that the Light is above does not have opinions or emotions such as those of gods or (troll deity thingies). Instead, theologians prefer to characterize the Light as an opinion or emotion. This theory tends to take three forms using three different senses of the word "love." First, the Light may be an opinion, the love of good thoughts and actions. Second, the Light may be a universal, brotherly love among beings. Third, the Light may be a universal, motherly love towards beings.

I have already problematized The stance that the Light is "the love of goodness" is difficult to maintain against the objections already marshalled. If the Light by definition loves good things, but some of the things which it seems to love are not good, then one must once again accept these things as good or reject this theory.

However, the other two "love" theories are problematic as to who is supposed to be the lover; if one attempts to avoid the charge of anthropomorphism by characterizing the Light as love, there still must be some intelligent entity to do the loving. Attributing this love to "the universe" is possibly an even more problematic anthropomorphism than that of the Light. One could posit an intelligent lover that is not identical to the universe, but that forces theism.

Some philosophers have attempted to identify the lover as the whole of intelligent life; the Light is the brotherly or motherly love of real beings manifest as magical energy. This view has several serious problems, however, perhaps the greatest of which is that intelligent beings seem, on the whole, not to feel these sorts of universal loves; even when the Light-wielding races are not at war with one another, they are rife with hatred it cannot be said that they always love each of their neighbors.

There are two counter-objections, the first being that while laypeople may not feel universal love, those who become priests and paladins do, and this is what enables them to tap into the power of the Light. This view is sadly laughable does not concur with the evidence.

The second counter-objection is that the people of the Light do, in fact, all love one another, but only on a subconscious level. This seems to be so much sophistry an unsatisfactory explanation, as it is strange to contend that people really feel love when there is no evidence in their behavior or self-report. The claim that all people feel subconscious, undetectable love for one another does not seem any more sound than a claim that all people feel subconscious hatred for one another or that all people feel subconscious love for cheese and that this is the Light.

The "Light as love" theory becomes even further problematized by the sometimes abusive apparently unloving actions of this "love." The Light does not merely destroy demons and the undead but can be used to gruesome effect against innocent mortals. Furthermore, while it is sometimes wielded in love, in order to heal wounds and soothe pains, it is just as often wielded in rage and malice against one's enemies. Originated in love and protectiveness as this hatred may be, it remains hatred.

Perhaps, then, the Light is not love but



[The preceding paragraphs are not scratched out, but have Xs drawn in the margins next to them.]



Astrolabe,

My back hurts like craziness today. Maybe you should heal me because you are better at that than me. I hope I did not hurt myself very seriously.

Seol 25 ← Seol 26 → Astrolabe 17