A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

RESPONSES 2001-9 (Sept)

Archive Index


: « First : « 100 : « 10 : Displaying #131 - #140 of 292 records. : 10 » : 100 » : Last » :


Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :


Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Did Mab have any children besides Oberon? If so are they more or less powerful than Oberon?

Greg responds...

Not answering this now.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Was it intentional to make Nick Maza similar to Captain of the Guard since both are described by you in the Garg bible and the 2198 contest as much like a gargoyle as a human can be?

Greg responds...

You're taking that too literally.

I was actually trying to connect Nick up to Tom, thematically.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

since Fox has twice as much Children of Oberon blood in her as Alex and Alex has managed to live til 2198 would Fox herself still be alive in 2198?

Greg responds...

Not revealing one way or another.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Punchinello writes...

Mr. Weisman,

I'm sorry I did not acknowledge your response before now. I only realized that you had addressed my post on sentience a moment ago.

I did not really think that you condoned the obliteration of a family of polar bears (anthropomorphic or otherwise). I was raising the issue because I think I am observing a trend wherein people are only assigning value to a life based upon an inference of anthropomorphism. That is to say, some people are investing their ethical concern in something based upon how much it resembles a human being; and this is hardly an objective premise to begin with. Semblance to human beings, mental or otherwise, can not constitute a requirement for being worthy of consideration or protection. However I do believe that it is reasonable to assign values based upon certain criteria from within our own perspectives (it's the only thing we can assign values from) as long as we make a concerted effort to avoid an obviously centrist sentiment like using ourselves as a template for what is worth consideration.

If someone were to ask me what criteria I thought were appropriate, I would probably return to what has already been implied. Intelligence. Emotional intuition. Volition. And a whole host of perceptual characteristics. Those things from which emerge a picture of mental life. Perhaps an ability to suffer and to anticipate conditions which cause or alleviate suffering, and to desire to distance ones self from a cause of it. However, if we are going to determine the presence of those capacities with nothing but purely verifiable data, then we fall in league with the evolutionary psychologists foundation of mental within the biological. And the biological machinery necessary to mediate these abilities is certainly not the exclusive domain of Homo Sapiens. (I _do_ subscribe to the evolutionary psychologist foundation by the way. I like to have data I can verify beyond "it is true because it is so.")

For a lot of people though, these emergent mental properties are always considered as something transcendent of biology, immeasurable, even inviolate, because I have observed others react with hostility to the reduction of mental qualities to biology. On numerous occasions. Thinking that way leads to all kinds of misunderstandings, however. Another contributor to this board, Entity, had taken the position that humans and gorillas were intelligent but dogs were not. I found this extremely interesting because even outside the realm of biological architectures in the brain I could use as a foundation for taking the evolutionary psychologist position, it needs to be acknowledged that even within social psychology dogs are attributed a measurable intelligence. It's not extraordinary. My dog has an IQ of 12 or so for instance. And of course these kinds of figures are disputable, because it really requires the participation of the test subject past his simple presence to get accurate results. I would submit that the whole concept of IQ as it is accepted within the social sciences borders on being fraudulent anyway. The point is that the ascription of non-intelligence that was made about the dog was arbitrary. It was not informed by the physical _or_ social sciences. It was just an assumption. And that kind of casual valuization can be dangerous when it functions as the basis for how much respect we offer another. This is not a slight against this Entity. I'm just using this as an example to outline the stated purpose of my original post. If people are going to hold these positions they maintain, then they need to ask themselves why they have that particular belief. If they have this mental dialogue with themselves and they cannot answer that first question, then it is time to evaluate how much their beliefs represent reality.

____________________________________________________________________________
I'm probably as guilty as anyone of overusing, or rather overbilling the issue of "sentience". I think the concept has its uses. But it's probably used as a crutch too often.
____________________________________________________________________________

I would agree. I think of it as a crutch of language. Some people subscribe to an ideology that is a holdover from religious impulses. It maintains that the mantle of "human" is sacred and unapproachable. They need to define what the quality of "human" is that makes it thus, without any background knowledge of cognitive science so that it fits their sensibilities. They can adopt the hazily defined expression, "sentience", imported from popular culture, via star trek, to articulate their position. For some others, the mental capacities of non human animals may be very well understood. They may acknowledge capacities for reflection and emotion, but they still need a convenient means of distinguishing various abilities. So an imprecise language becomes common.

Greg responds...

Agreed. And I'll also admit that your thinking on this subject is much more sophisiticated than mine has been.

I think a lot of how we are defining sentience does come down to the "Potential for Direct Communication", which is of course a fairly preposterous criteria.

On the other hand, if it is truly another hand, I don't think these ideas are mutually exclusive with notions of religion. Dog heaven, man. You know?

And don't worry about not getting back to me sooner. As I'm sure you've noticed, there's something of a delay going on in this whole system. I have trouble keeping up with the posts here. So as long as you remind me of what we were talking about, we should be fine.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

in the gargoyles universe, why did the chicken cross the road?

i'm not telling a joke, i'm looking for an answer. i swear theres a good one here somewhere... and this will keep me busy til the next contest!

Greg responds...

To find out how many gargoyles it takes to screw in a lightbulb, I guess.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Lacey writes...

Which character do you feel is most like you, or closely resembles you physically and/or mentally?

Greg responds...

None really resembles me physically, I think. But many of you have seen me at Gatherings. Do you agree?

As for mentally... if you took ALL the characters and squashed them together you'd get me, I think.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Yttrium writes...

You mentioned you were in a play called THE WARRIOR'S HUSBAND and played Theseus. Could you tell us what it was about?

---Ytt

Greg responds...

Sure. Although, keep in mind, that I was in this play over twenty years ago. So I may be misremembering stuff. I'd recommend hitting a library and reading it for yourself. It's by Julian Thompson.

But anyway... Hercules and Theseus attack the Amazons to get the girdle of Hippolyta, which Herc needs to complete his ninth labor. Homer is along to report on the action.

Hercules is very strong and carries a big club, but is neither bright nor brave in this play. Theseus is smart and cunning and good with a sword. He likes to let Herc stand up as the front man, while he makes things work behind the scenes. He's used to getting his way.

The Greeks come up against the Amazon Queen Hippolyta and her younger sister Princess Antiope. All the Amazon men are pretty wimpy. The title character is an Amazon man named Sapiens, Hippolyta's husband. He gains backbone as the play progresses.

Theseus and Antiope do battle. Antiope is very turned on to find a man who can hold his own with her. Theseus, used to just getting what he wants, is also knocked for a loop to find an equal in this woman. They fall in love. Together, they end the war. Herc gets a girdle. Not THE girdle, but everyone figures no one will notice the difference. It ends happily.

It's a bit of fluff, but I remember really liking it. Fun fluff. (It probably didn't hurt that in rehearsing the kiss between Antiope and Theseus, Elizabeth and I sort of discovered that we liked each other. As a result, we were boyfriend and girlfriend throughout my senior year of high school. So, as you can imagine, my memories of the play are rather fond.) Elizabeth also recently reminded me that David Schwimmer, now of FRIENDS, played Giganius the Herald.

FYI, Katharine Hepburn played Antiope in the original Broadway cast.

And thanks for asking this question. It makes me very nostalgic.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

in The Mirror when the are in that plaza and battling Demona as humans, why is there a shop selling medieval weopons? Demona breaks a store window and all of a sudden the clan starts grabbing swords, sheilds, maces, spears, axes... why are those in NYC?

Greg responds...

They just are. Have you been to New York? They sell all sorts of things there.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

Legion questions:

1. when Recap downloaded the computer virus through the taser line from Coldstone, why didn't the virus destroy recaps programming?

2. when Coldstone first arrives at the Clocktower with Goliath and Lex, Bronx is growling at him. why? Iago has yet to take control of Coldstone. does Bronx just hate the cybernetics of Coldstone or does he sense the evil one or something?

Greg responds...

1. It destroyed much of Recap's programming. But keep in mind, Xanatos knew what he was after. So he got the virus working on a loop of some kind so that it wouldn't SELF-destruct.

2. I'd have to see it again.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

Broadway bring back Maggie's Genutech bracelet after they first encounter her and Elisa says its a tracking device. doesn't that mean that Genutech knows where they went with it? is this how Xanatos found their new home? why wasn't the clan worried about bringing a tracking device into their home? seems kinda foolish to me, esspecially in light of what would happen with a tracking device in Hunters Moon!

Greg responds...

I'm fairly certain that Broadway says it's busted now. (But perhaps I'm confusing it with another episode.)

Response recorded on September 08, 2001


: « First : « 100 : « 10 : Displaying #131 - #140 of 292 records. : 10 » : 100 » : Last » :