zompist bboard

Well, it isn't the first time I think about that, but here I finally go with my question. Do the Ilii have gone into space? Travel to the three moons? Perhaps even beyond?*

If they haven't, are there any reasons why?

* Jokingly, what about Ilii coming to Earth as aliens!

I assume they've been in space and explored Almea's system a bit, but not gone into interstellar space.

zompist wrote:I assume they've been in space and explored Almea's system a bit, but not gone into interstellar space.

What made them stop, just out of interest (also, what about the implications like bunkers and stuff still lying around Almea)?

Religious convictions, at least in part. They believe that their place is Almea and they shouldn't get too far from it, nor intrude on other people's planets.

Really? I always kind of pictured them as post-religious given the various descriptions of them as being super-advanced and wise beyond even our civilization.

Eddy wrote:Really? I always kind of pictured them as post-religious given the various descriptions of them as being super-advanced and wise beyond even our civilization.

How wise are we really? There's a great difference between knowledge and wisdom, and it isn't really that difficult to be wise beyond our civilization. I'd expect an ancient wise race to respect life in the universe, and be concerned about meddling with it.

It's entirely possible to maintain a strong belief in God while having a good deal of scientific knowledge. A think our civilization's secular orientation has nothing to do with our technological advancement. Communism and the hippie ideology have quickly fallen out of fashion . And they liked to predict that theistic worldview will disappear...

The ilii may have had such a period of godlessness some 10 000 years ago.

Barvitex wrote:It's entirely possible to maintain a strong belief in God while having a good deal of scientific knowledge. A think our civilization's secular orientation has nothing to do with our technological advancement. Communism and the hippie ideology have quickly fallen out of fashion . And they liked to predict that theistic worldview will disappear...

Indeed. While it is fashionable to associate superstition with a low level of scientific awareness (e.g. Bushmen, Creationists), there's no need to assume advanced technology goes hand-in-hand with the "post-religious" mindset.

On-topic: 'Twould be neat if the Iliu discovered life on Vlerëi, or colonized it somehow... I suppose when Almea is finished, that'll be Zompist's next project.

I don't believe either that scientific knowledge leads to a destruction of faith. On the contrary, it might strengthen it. (Though it might not be the way some religious people would want it to be. I am deeply religious. But without a god...)

Also, remember that on Almea, things are different from here. Magic has some effect, and the vyozi, which are somewhat real, are not much different from spirits. This may lead to a different evolution, especially an understanding that part of your Universe is marvellous and mysteriously difficult to comprehend by mere mechanical schemes.

Look at Cuzeian theism. It is slightly outdated (over 4000 years), but you probably get something of an easily understandable snapshot of what they believe. And they have a strong sense of natural conservatism, which explains why they might want to stay on Almea and not go live further. And their attitude a la Prime Directive is also something to consider. They don't interfere much in Uesti affairs, so if they ever met Extraalmeans...

Eddy wrote:Really? I always kind of pictured them as post-religious given the various descriptions of them as being super-advanced and wise beyond even our civilization.

They are supposed to have specifically taught monotheism to several civilizations, so I would assume some sort of spirituality prevails among them.

Yiuel wrote:I don't believe either that scientific knowledge leads to a destruction of faith. On the contrary, it might strengthen it.

Indeed. I have heard more than one story of a scientist who, after being an atheist when young, found his personal relationship to God through the study of Nature. It is far from uncommon for scientists to be deeply religious; there is no contradiction in that.

Back on topic: I think the ilii, despite or rather because of their advanced science which led them to their deep respect for nature, are indeed very religious in their own, personal way. That they are respectful of other life forms can be seen from the simple fact that they refrained from colonizing the dry land on Almea. They certainly could blast all the uesti, elcari, ktuvoki, flaids and what else lives there out of existence if they wished - but they don't because they respect them.

Hmm, I suppose the whole magic thing would tend to offset secular tendencies (assuming it isn't underlyingly scientific). But my impression has been that religion is on the decline in the first world, even outside of Marxist and hippie circles. Many of religion's harshest critics are neither. But then again, this is something I've seen debated a lot with few conclusive answers. I suppose one can't really predict with any certainty how a different species in a different universe would have to act.

The trouble with extrapolating Terran cultural phenomena (such as a general decline in religion in areas of highly evolved science), precipitated by Terran events (such as the Enlightenment, among others), to other planets and other cultures is that we have no other frame of reference.

This is the case even for Earth cultures. For instance, would, say, the Iroquois have eventually invented the telephone if Europe hadn't gotten to the Americas by then? If nobody had even attempted to open up Qing China, could it have eventually industrialized on its own? There's no way to tell, because those didn't happen, and likewise it's impossible to tell what would happen to their religious beliefs if these did happen.

Eddy wrote:Hmm, I suppose the whole magic thing would tend to offset secular tendencies (assuming it isn't underlyingly scientific). But my impression has been that religion is on the decline in the first world, even outside of Marxist and hippie circles. Many of religion's harshest critics are neither. But then again, this is something I've seen debated a lot with few conclusive answers.

Being a strong critic of religion myself, I yet don't think that faith is failing. On the opposite, when you have well established certitudes like those in science, it is really easy to have faith and to embrace it easily. Some fall into scientism, which can create problems. But faith in the results of scientific research has never been so strong, and may be stronger than most religions have never been. Faith just became something else in those religions's harshest critics.

I suppose one can't really predict with any certainty how a different species in a different universe would have to act.

You can't, but still, if you have all or most details, you can make educated guesses about how they would react. For Almea, Magic and how it works is the detail you most not forget.

In Virtual Verduria, zompist wrote:To the magicians, magic is a science as well as a faith. They have mapped out the supernatural world for their purposes (which never include mere curiosity). It rarely encourages them in the mythology of the masses, but it makes them mystical, and a magician is never an atheist. "Enäron exists," insists one magical writer. "Yet He is not as you conceive. Shall I tell you of what nature He is? Do I dare speak? Do you dare listen?"

So there is actually a god in Almea. Then I suppose it makes sense afterall.

Eddy wrote:So there is actually a god in Almea. Then I suppose it makes sense afterall.

PAY NOT ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN.

The Almean project is the same sort of thing as "The Encyclopedia of Tlon" described by J.L. Borges in "Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius". Only that was created by a big team of anonymous contributors...

Perhaps Almea would be more detailed if some people were engaged to "fill in the gaps". For example to name all the hunter - gatherer tribes of Rau Jungle, or work out how minor languages are related to the major ones described by Mark.

I know that's well meant, but no, Almea is a personal project.

As for gods or God, I like Neil Gaiman's observation: the universe rewards belief systems. Believe in omnipotent teddy bears, and you'll soon start finding evidence for omnipotent teddy bears.

zompist wrote:As for gods or God, I like Neil Gaiman's observation: the universe rewards belief systems. Believe in omnipotent teddy bears, and you'll soon start finding evidence for omnipotent teddy bears.

Are you an atheist

Barvitex wrote:

zompist wrote:As for gods or God, I like Neil Gaiman's observation: the universe rewards belief systems. Believe in omnipotent teddy bears, and you'll soon start finding evidence for omnipotent teddy bears.

Are you an atheist

I don't think Gaiman was intending to be snarky here, nor was I. I'm skeptical of any declarations about the ultimate nature of the cosmos, whether theistic or atheistic.

Then you're agnostic?

I think that's what his statement implies, yes.

"sceptical" = "not knowing" = "a-gnostic"

zompist wrote:As for gods or God, I like Neil Gaiman's observation: the universe rewards belief systems. Believe in omnipotent teddy bears, and you'll soon start finding evidence for omnipotent teddy bears.

I take it the other way round. You can't believe in anything until you've seen some evidence for it, even if it's only hearsay evidence.

What's more, believing something doesn't make you find evidence for it. For example in my PhD study I had been told a certain compound was photostable. But when I ran it as a control I soon found evidence that it wasn't photostable after all. My belief had absolutely no control over reality.

Mornche Geddick wrote:

zompist wrote:As for gods or God, I like Neil Gaiman's observation: the universe rewards belief systems. Believe in omnipotent teddy bears, and you'll soon start finding evidence for omnipotent teddy bears.

I take it the other way round. You can't believe in anything until you've seen some evidence for it, even if it's only hearsay evidence.

What's more, believing something doesn't make you find evidence for it. For example in my PhD study I had been told a certain compound was photostable. But when I ran it as a control I soon found evidence that it wasn't photostable after all. My belief had absolutely no control over reality.

You did not get zompist's point. It's not belief that will create evidence. It's faith, in its strongest version, that will make people interpret the world through their beliefs, making them find evidence (but only interpretations of events, really) to support their belief.