From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Wed Mar 4 16:05:43 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA27514 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 16:05:42 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id PAA15886 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 15:19:55 -0600 Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 15:19:55 -0600 Message-Id: <199803042119.PAA15886@lists.io.com> From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #658 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Wednesday, March 4 1998 Volume 01 : Number 658 In this digest: Re: IN> [Fluff] David? Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Judaism Re: IN> Perspective (Fwd) Re: IN> In Nomine Superiors PBEM Re: IN> [Fluff] David? Re: (Fwd) Re: IN> In Nomine Superior PBEM Re: IN> In Nomine Superiors IN> Why The Game doesn't use Triads IN> [Fluff] David IN> Cats IN> Cats IN> Cats IN> Sentient/Sapient IN> Byer.... Re: IN> Byer.... RE: IN> Byer.... Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Cats Re: IN> Cats ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 14:08:29 -0500 From: "David C. Shadle" Subject: Re: IN> [Fluff] David? > I read somewhere that in the US, the name David is an almost exclusively > Jewish name, whereas here in Australia it is a reasonably common name, > regardless of faith. > I was wondering if that is true? It was written in a reasonably old book > of baby names. Your source is incorrect. I know many David's besides myself, (about 12.) None of them are Jewish. Its a reasonably common name over here as well. It might have been true when the book was printed, but not within the past 2 decades. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 22:37:49 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: Re: IN> Cats At 09:22 04/03/98 +1100, you wrote: > > >I would actually think any scientist who fights against evidence with >reason 'is' being a scientist. I think the general idea is that you counter evidence with more evidence ;-) jo - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Mar 98 18:43 EST From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Judaism [Steve Jessop:] >Of course the important question for the purposes of IN is, where did the >Law come from in the first place? Humans/David/Dominic/God are the four >main contenders to my mind. There are suggestions that Yves had a hand in the development of *some* human religions. Certainly he was involved in Islam, according to canon, and his writeups in the core rules and in Heaven and Hell at least imply that he and his servitors may have helped instigate some human religions. Various other AAs may have had a hand, too. And humans probably came up with a lot of it themselves -- after all, they invented the ethereal-based religions. My own personal view is that some human religions were either instigated by celestial actions, or at least guided occasionally by celestials. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are the obvious candidates, with some others possibly being peripherally influenced. (The way I read the Yves stuff, he used to promote religion not so much as divine truth as a way for humans to grow in the right directions -- he's now abandoned that approach for the more abstract forms of philosophy.) - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 21:48:10 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> Perspective At 02:14 PM 3/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >At 10:01 PM +0900 3/2/98, Simon Hailes wrote: >>At 09:52 AM 2/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >>> Elizabeth, Lilim Servitor of Lust > > 'Scuse, but aren't you sort of, well, excuse >the profanity, but "preaching to the choir"? > >(Or is this some other Elizabeth who wanted to be a Daughter of >Lilith for over a decade now...?) > >--Beth, Demon Princess of Nitpicking >http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/articles/INChar/Demons/Prince.Beth.html > > > >Um, this Elizabeth was in no way based on you, she was created long before I knew yo existed (well not that long) she was a character for an In Nomine story I wanted to write, it was about an faair with a saint of Novalis occurring at about the same time she was going for a word, set in my version of In Nomine Chicago, great city by the way. Simon, Demon Prince of Turtle Wax ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:10:35 GMT+10 From: "Leath Sheales" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: (Fwd) Re: IN> In Nomine Superiors PBEM Dear list, This is forwarded from Simon Hailes, regarding his Superiors PBEM. If you are interested, contact him on . Leath. - -------------------------------------------------------------- I have decided that as a minor superior you will start with 20 Forces, divided any which way, with 6 Word Forces, this will determine Essence intake, generally 6d*10 a week, you will get usual character points (80 of them) to spend, except you already start out with all the attunements you offer (you have to make them up yourself, unless you really don't want to, remember, the real Superior had to create them all) You also start off with six rites of which three are generally known (like I said before you make these up yourself, unless you really don't want to), this leaves specials you can spend points on, one special is the afformentioned Song of Creation, double normal points, also Greater Songs, double points (basically more powerful versions of the usual songs, eg Greater Song of Light can go through one enemy and sear another, Entropy can erode mountains, Thunder can loosen foundations, etc) Song of Fertility, etc, plus new backgrounds like Wild Card, which is basically information, objects and individual, while not actually serving you, or not directly serving you, but at appropriate times can really be used to your advantage. 1 information about a dissonant Malakim, remnant who will help 2-info on a Tethers structure, a sympathetic Child of the Grigori 3-knowing about Belial's hidden nukes, a renegade or outcast blackmailed or cajoled 4-Data on the Loweer Hells, someone on the Other side 5-Laurence's perversions on video tape, a Word bound servitor on either side 6-You can call on an intervention. This costs three points a level. Next is Cathedral, you must describe your cathedral or principality, then take a rating, from 1 to 6, three points a level, 1 meaning a tenuous connection, 3-being average control, 6 making you a virtual God in your domain. Ie, add Word forces to rating to exact change in terrain, laws or even effect someone in your realm. Then their are Tethers, you start with one, describe it of course, that have six ratings in strength but only three are open to minor Superiors, 1 is Chalet, small with 12 Forces seneschal, and three soldiers, 1 angel or two saints as guards, 2 Manor, medium with 14 Force Seneschal and either six soldiers, three undead or saints, or two angels or demons, 3-Fort, large with 16 Force seneschal, nine soldiers, five saints undead,three angels demons (mix matching aloud, saint or mummy equals half soldiers, celestials one third soldiers) each Tether costs three points per level. Lastly is servitors, you have 100 to start with, plus 200 spirits, Archangels servitors are divided as thus, seventy percent nine forces, twenty percent ten forces, five percent eleven, five percent twelve. spirits are 50 three force, fifty four force, fifty five force, fifty six force (Hell also follows this) each spirit on earth costs you essence equal to forces per week, unless you make vessel for one, Demon Princes have fifty percent seven force demons, twentyfive percent nine, tenpercent ten force, ten percent eleven and five percent twelve, also an Archangel has saints equal to word forces, soliders equal to word forces times ten, Princes have same for soldiers, but undead or sorcorers equal to word forces. Archangels get 1d times ten souls a week, which each contribute 1 essence a week. DP's get 1d times a hundred souls a week who venture 1 essence a week (most of the essence gets consumed by servitors) you start off as an Archangel with 1d times a hundred souls, as a DP 1d times ten thousand, starting essence is 100 times forces, vessels cost Limbo prices, new servitors cost 5 essence a force if existing forces are used, or 15 essence to conjure forces from the void, 10 character points buys normal forces, 20 buys word forces. And background is important. That's all for now, I'm tired and must sleep. Simon, resurrected Prince of Sloth "I'm too old for this shit," Roger Murtaugh, Lethal Weapon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 21:18:34 -0500 (EST) From: Pee Kitty Subject: Re: IN> [Fluff] David? On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, David Streeter wrote: > I read somewhere that in the US, the name David is an almost exclusively > Jewish name, whereas here in Australia it is a reasonably common name, > regardless of faith. David is an extremely common name over here, regardless of faith. I know several Christians and Catholics wiht that name. Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! And finally, a special message to \|/ ____ \|/ anyone who thinks I give a damn... ~@-/ oO \-@~ /_( \__/ )_\ \__U_/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 03:50:13 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: IN> In Nomine Superior PBEM At 01:10 PM 4/03/98 GMT+10, you wrote: >Dear list, > >This is forwarded from Simon Hailes, regarding his Superiors PBEM. >If you are interested, contact him on . > >Leath. > >-------------------------------------------------------------- > I have decided that as a >minor superior you will start with 20 Forces, divided any which way, with 6 >Word Forces, this will determine Essence intake, generally 6d*10 a week, >you will get usual character points (80 of them) to spend, except you >already start out with all the attunements you offer (you have to make them >up yourself, unless you really don't want to, remember, the real Superior >had to create them all) You also start off with six rites of which three >are generally known (like I said before you make these up yourself, unless >you really don't want to), this leaves specials you can spend points on, >one special is the afformentioned Song of Creation, double normal points, >also Greater Songs, double points (basically more powerful versions of the >usual songs, eg Greater Song of Light can go through one enemy and sear >another, Entropy can erode mountains, Thunder can loosen foundations, etc) >Song of Fertility, etc, plus new backgrounds like Wild Card, which is >basically information, objects and individual, while not actually serving >you, or not directly serving you, but at appropriate times can really be >used to your advantage. 1 information about a dissonant Malakim, remnant >who will help 2-info on a Tethers structure, a sympathetic Child of the >Grigori 3-knowing about Belial's hidden nukes, a renegade or outcast >blackmailed or cajoled 4-Data on the Loweer Hells, someone on the Other >side 5-Laurence's perversions on video tape, a Word bound servitor on >either side 6-You can call on an intervention. This costs three points a >level. >Next is Cathedral, you must describe your cathedral or principality, then >take a rating, from 1 to 6, three points a level, 1 meaning a tenuous >connection, 3-being average control, 6 making you a virtual God in your >domain. Ie, add Word forces to rating to exact change in terrain, laws or >even effect someone in your realm. >Then their are Tethers, you start with one, describe it of course, that >have six ratings in strength but only three are open to minor Superiors, 1 >is Chalet, small with 12 Forces seneschal, and three soldiers, 1 angel or >two saints as guards, 2 Manor, medium with 14 Force Seneschal and either >six soldiers, three undead or saints, or two angels or demons, 3-Fort, >large with 16 Force seneschal, nine soldiers, five saints undead,three >angels demons (mix matching aloud, saint or mummy equals half soldiers, >celestials one third soldiers) each Tether costs three points per level. >Lastly is servitors, you have 100 to start with, plus 200 spirits, >Archangels servitors are divided as thus, seventy percent nine forces, >twenty percent ten forces, five percent eleven, five percent twelve. >spirits are 50 three force, fifty four force, fifty five force, fifty six >force (Hell also follows this) each spirit on earth costs you essence equal >to forces per week, unless you make vessel for one, Demon Princes have >fifty percent seven force demons, twentyfive percent nine, tenpercent ten >force, ten percent eleven and five percent twelve, also an Archangel has >saints equal to word forces, soliders equal to word forces times ten, >Princes have same for soldiers, but undead or sorcorers equal to word >forces. Archangels get 1d times ten souls a week, which each contribute 1 >essence a week. DP's get 1d times a hundred souls a week who venture 1 >essence a week (most of the essence gets consumed by servitors) you start >off as an Archangel with 1d times a hundred souls, as a DP 1d times ten >thousand, starting essence is 100 times forces, vessels cost Limbo prices, >new servitors cost 5 essence a force if existing forces are used, or 15 >essence to conjure forces from the void, 10 character points buys normal >forces, 20 buys word forces. And background is important. >That's all for now, I'm tired and must sleep. >Continuing, vessels are bought same way, and yes you can have roles, word special vessels cost double normal minus word forces, minimum one point of course, in game vessels for yourself cost Limbo points, you can have as many vessels operating at a time as you have Word Forces, but you must divide them (this is reason IMO that Michael and others like him haven't hacked half the opposition to pieces already) also you can appear Celestial in Tether no cost, outside Tether costs 3 Essence for each Celestial Force, You can remove dissonance and discord, at the rate of 4 essence per point of dissonance, 6 per level of Discord, you can also bestow it but at double cost, any time, you can kick out servitor, must destroy heart though and this costs forces of Celestial times 10 essence. You receive dissonance yourself for breaking rules for Choir/Band or your word. Creating new attunements cost twenty character points, creating new rites costs ten. >Simon, resurrected Prince of Sloth > >"I'm too old for this shit," Roger Murtaugh, Lethal Weapon > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 03:59:53 +0900 From: Simon Hailes Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine Superiors In Nomine Superiors will be set as soon as all submissions are made, I'll notify you all, then you will get your introduction, for Archangels it will be a meeting of the Seraphim Council, for Demon Princes it will be an interrogation in Lucy's Lower Hell Palace (make sure you dress warmly) then you can assign servitors, plot, amass and destroy, note, anyone unhappy with submissions rules is more then welcome to offer alternatives, You know, two heads are better then one and all that. Simon, Angel from the Prophecy who gets toasted "Notice that whenever God needed something done, he always sent an angel?" cop, The Prophecy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 06:23:10 +0000 From: Jo Hart Subject: IN> Why The Game doesn't use Triads Triads? You are new. No, we don't work in triads often. Only to mock judgement -- it doesn't really suit our working practices. In any triad, one will be redundant. Pairs are more common, and each pair is shadowed by another pair. They may not tell you who at first, or ever. Your first trip out will probably just be a reconnaisance. Just remember that you are always being shadowed. Shedim get tagged by Djinn. Expect to spend about half your time running genuine work missions, and the other half shadowing another pair. I remember.. never mind. Anyway, you will be debriefed by your direct supervisor weekly. Your pair-partner will be debriefed seperately and you will be expected to comment on each other. They reward minions who successfully report their partners for lax behaviour. The reward may take awhile coming, but its a good mark on your record. Spotting your shadows and reporting on them will be worth extra marks if you can do it accurately. You might want to let them lie awhile though, and make sure they see what you want them to see. Spotting your shadows will only get them replaced by someone better. Sometimes you may get debriefed by someone else who may ask you about your direct supervisor. Be very careful before commenting. What one demon may see as you being observant and keen, may be interpreted by another as subversive tendencies. If you aren't sure, say as little as possible. You will never be sure. You may never be sure of anything again. Its very unlikely that you will ever know who is reporting to whom, or what they are saying. Sometimes you may find that you have been assigned a new partner with no reason given. Never ask why. Never ask where someone is. That is a bad question. It will get you noticed in a bad way. Sometimes you may find your name on a list for a special mission, with demons you have never met before and a leader you do not know. When you get back, try to forget whatever happened. As well as standard rounds, you are in the local pool which may mean you can be lent to other superiors, as well as anyone in our own organisation who needs whatever talents you are supposed to possess. You may be debriefed after these operations also. You will be told what you need to know. Do not always expect to know when our Superior debriefs us. Sometimes he will sit silently in the shadows during your standard debriefing, or borrow the face or form of someone you thought you knew. Or sometimes it will be the grey office and the faceless mask. Every Game outpost has an unmarked letterbox in which anyone can post an anonymous accusation of anyone else. All of those reports are investigated - -- but it isn't true that the boxes are unwatched and safe to use secretly. Thats often said, but it isn't true. Anyone who uses the facility will have their name taken down. If the report is true, they will be watched even more closely. You will become very practiced at shadowing and watching from afar. Most of us have several vessels and it is never difficult to get clearance for more. Be aware that Game vessels are often tagged. Technology, yes. Did you think our master would let any of his possessions out if he was not sure of finding them? The only Game-renegade I ever heard of who survived more than a week deliberately destroyed all of his vessels and took his chances in limbo. Yes, that includes Shedim. As I said, they are always Djinn-tagged. - ------ Notes [1] Standard Game recon teams always work in pairs (but each pair is shadowed by a second pair who will not break their cover -- even to fight angels) [2] Any Game stronghold/ tether is likely to have a pair of demons at the top of the organisation who will be able to organise their lesser minions into special teams as required. They'll be able to put together strike forces very quickly, depending on how well staffed their operation is. [3] Game forces in one stronghold wil be VERY reluctant to call for more help from hell or from their superior (although they may swap minions with other local equivalents in nearby cities) unless things are critically bad. Death may be preferable. Celestial death may be preferable in some circumstances. This is why Baal's troops are generally more of a threat to angelic plans. They aren't afraid to call for reinforcements. The exception to this is Asmodean hounds. Djinn in dog vessels are available in a pool to Game servitors above a given ranking and can be shuffled around at short notice for tracking purposes. [4] Lilim are exceptionally well treated in the organisation. Its extremely unfair, deliberately so. Asmodeus likes to have outstanding geases on every single one of his servitors, so its common for Lilim to sit in on briefings and resonate for needs. They are hated and envied by all of his other servitors, which keeps them loyal beyond the call of geases. They exist on the Prince of the Game's whim. Without his favour, they would be green smears along the ceiling, from the centuries of resentment of other demons - -- but with it, they get special treatment. Very special treatment. Lilim who turn in other Lilim are richly rewarded, and showered with all that their little green selfish hearts desire. It happens more commonly than Lilith would care to admit. - ---------- "I like getting into hot water, it keeps me clean." G. K. Chesterton jhart@btinternet.com -- http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~jhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:21:34 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> [Fluff] David >I read somewhere that in the US, the name David is an almost exclusively Jewish name, whereas here in Australia it is a reasonably common name, regardless of faith. < Not true. David is a common "nondenominational" name here too. - -David (who's not Jewish, despite my last name) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:21:37 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Cats >What is the evidence one way or the other? I didn't think current psychology was much interested in such questions. < I am not an expert on animal behavior, but I have seen a few studies; there is a lot of evidence that animals blur the distinctions more than those who'd like to believe in an absolute distinction between humans and animals want to admit (animals may actually feel emotions, for example, though the jury seems to still be out), but animals fail most tests we're able to administer for determining sentience. Of course critics will point out that our definition of sentience is necessarily humanocentric. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:21:40 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Cats >But this doesn't mean they don't have some sort of self-awareness, or ability to make decisions based on past experiences and current whim.< I'd question self-awareness. Ability to learn from experience, certainly, but that's not a sentient trait. You can teach goldfish to come to the surface for food when you tap the side of their aquarium. As for personality; different animals have had different experiences, leading to different "subroutines" in their instincts, if you will. And I am sure that there is a certain degree of randomness in how animals will react to any situation -- they aren't computer programs that can be mapped and whose responses can be predicted with absolute certainty. Nonetheless, I maintain that most of what pet-owners regard as "personality" is just hardwired cognitive schema reacting to stimulus. And yes, the same is true of baby humans. Whether or not there is some gap we jump when achieving sentience, or if it is just a matter of degree (the "subroutines" branching out until you have so many infinite possibilities that the distinction between sentience and simulated sentience becomes irrelevant, as with what one might imagine from an enormously sophisticated Eliza program), I do not know. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:21:47 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Cats >This entire thread is heresay.< Inasmuch as we are all just reporting what we have learned elsewhere and expressing our opinions based on them, I suppose so. >I would actually think any scientist who fights against evidence with reason 'is' being a scientist.< Mmm, no. A scientist doesn't "fight against" evidence, he _tests_ it. > Judgements over the intensity or motivation for that reasoning are highly subjective.< As are most all judgments, but subjective does not mean inaccurate. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:21:44 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: IN> Sentient/Sapient >I think the use of "sentient" to mean "sapient" traces back to Star Trek.< Perhaps, but it's entered the common vernacular now. I did look it up, though, and you're right. Learn something new every day. :) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 07:59:22 -0500 From: Brandon Quina Subject: IN> Byer.... well, all. Its been fun. However, I just dont have the time anymore. Im on two more mailing lists than I was when I signed on, in addition to running two PBEM games (neither of them being In Nomine ones, so..) Well, im just gonna have to say goodbye. :) I really enjoy the discussion here, and ive even made afew friends. Ill be back. But for now, see ya :) - -- (lore@tmgbbs.com) \|/// Zzzzzzzzzzzz Brandon Lance Quina (- -) ICQ Number: 6809944 ---ooO(_)Ooo--- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:28:45 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Byer.... On Wed, Mar 04, 1998 at 07:59:22AM -0500, Brandon Quina wrote: > well, all. Its been fun. However, I just dont have the time > anymore. Im on two more mailing lists than I was when I signed > on, in addition to running two PBEM games (neither of them being > In Nomine ones, so..) > Traitor. I think we should send the Game to cut our your liver and feed it to my dog. (I played a Djinn of Dark Humour at a 'con last weekend. It's seeped into me, although he started resembling a Calabite more at the end.) Bye anyway. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 09:46:27 EST From: "Perry M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: IN> Byer.... [Brandon Lance Quina] >Well, im just gonna have to say goodbye. :) I really enjoy >the discussion here, and ive even made afew friends. Ill be >back. But for now, see ya :) > > > > May you find peace, discover serenity, and possess good fortune in your life. Fair journey. :) Until we meet again. - -Perry Perry M. Lloyd Check out the PBEM In Nomine: Soldiers of Linn webpage! "Nothing is sacred but truth. Too bad nobody can agree on what's sacred." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 11:29:23 +0000 From: Nathaniel Eliot Subject: Re: IN> Cats > >What is the evidence one way or the other? I didn't think current > psychology was much interested in such questions. > < > > I am not an expert on animal behavior, but I have seen a few > studies; there is a lot of evidence that animals blur the > distinctions more than those who'd like to believe in an absolute > distinction between humans and animals want to admit (animals may > actually feel emotions, for example, though the jury seems to still > be out), but animals fail most tests we're able to administer for > determining sentience. Of course critics will point out that our > definition of sentience is necessarily humanocentric. They did give an IQ test to an ape (Koko, or one of her sign-language using compatriates), one that is commonly used for deaf students. The ape scored rather poorly (a 45, if memory serves), but if several of the questions asked had been checked for relevance to ape 'culture' beforehand, the score would have been closer to 80. The offending questions were pretty blatant, too - an example: What is a good place to live? a) house b) tree c) cave d) river The 'correct' answer was A, but apes don't have houses, do they? Nathaniel Eliot temujin9@mci2000.com "It's the eternal question, really; to be a slave in Heaven, or a star in Hell. But sometimes Hell doesn't look like Hell. On a good day, it can look like LA." - Playing God ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 14:13:55 -0400 (EDT) From: gibsonc@NKU.EDU Subject: Re: IN> Cats You're arguing over what is basically PETA and you thought geometry was off-topic? Just a thought, someone said cats weren't sentient earlier- Sentient comes from the latin "to feel" Sapient comes from the latin "to think" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 11:40:10 +0500 From: daiv@cruzio.com (David M. Barr) Subject: Re: IN> Cats Sapience of catsand humans. excuse me while i step into my ego; I have a Bachelors degree in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, And a Masters in Education. I have speint a significant portiaon of the last seven years studying the development of personality. (Yes, I am the Uber Geek)) Any given individuals behaviors is governed by a combination of hardwired neurological instinct (which is programmed inot the critter at birth) and whatever experinces that te criter has had to laern from. this s roughly analagous to the hardware and software in a computer. Most critters are capable of learning, in that they will react consistently over time to a given stimulus if it is followed by a resulting stimulus. tap on the goldfish bowl, and then put food in the water. eventually, the fish will rise when you tap on the bowl, most of the time (some fish are just too dumb). By the same token; turn out thelights and give a child a painful electric shock. do this consistently, and the child _will_ be afraid of the dark. (note, do not ever even think of doing this in the real world. If you must alter a childs personlity, do it for philias rather than phobias. (For example, it is relatively easy to generate a sexual response with chocolate (and, of course, the programming works the other way to, such that you can help a child learn not to e afraid of he dark by following periods of darkness with pleasant/desireable stimulus. Increase the periods of darkness over time, and you can eventually get throuhgh the night))). This s rather simplistic, bu it s the basis for all learning, up though the laws of Quantum mechanics. (the rewards can be less obvious, but they are there). There are rules that govern how behavioral patterns develop over time(which is, how critters learn). Nobody has disocoverd / defined what all of those rules are, yet. But they appear to be the same for Humans as for other critters. The one trait that humans sometimes display that does not appear tobe consistently applicable in other animals, is the ability to take control over ouur own programming. If I percieve that there is something I need to learn, I will go out and learn it. By choice. A choice governed by my own self awareness, rathe than intrinsically externoal stimulus (Not always of course; I might just as well go out and learn something because I need to know it for a job, which would be an external stimulus). Early on in ligfe, People learn how to solve problems. Hungy? scream, and mom will feed you. Eventualy, that gets changed to hungy, eat. But the point is, we don't think about it, we just do it, from habit. This to is a survival trait, in that the development of habits (behaviors we learn and can undertake without conscious thought) allows people to pay attention to the environemnt. oiver time, Habits can be changed. This could lead to the argument, humans display sapient behaviors, other animals do not. Humans will learn new behaviors based on internal self awareness, animals will learn based only on environmental condidtions. (environmental conditions can be internal states, such as hunger, or thirst). Of course. how often do humnas really do that? how often do humnas really expend the energy, time and effort to do soemthing differently, solely because of self awareness, as opposed to environmntal factors. Based on the studying I have done in the last several years, not a hell of a lot. Most people, most of the time, are just as governed by instincts (hardwired) and/or habits as animals. The fact that people can, Under the right circumstances, change their habits is irrelevant if they don't. People do stuff the same way throughout their live, reagardless of how their lives may change. They do stuff the same way they have always done stuff, simply because that is the way they have alwys done stuff. Wether or not this is an effective way of accomplishing anythng is irrelevant. so. Pople are capable of sapeince, in that there is the possibility of altering their behaviors. But How many people are, by theat diefinition, truly sapient. How many people alter their behaviors based on self awareness. food for thought. - -Daiv ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:31:16 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Cats At 7:21 AM -0500 3/4/98, David Edelstein wrote: >>But this doesn't mean they don't have some sort of self-awareness, or >ability to make decisions based on past experiences and current whim.< > >I'd question self-awareness. Ability to learn from experience, certainly, >but that's not a sentient trait. You can teach goldfish to come to the >surface for food when you tap the side of their aquarium. And if you do that to our angelfish, they spook all over the tank and hide in a corner, traumatized... I don't know if cats have as much self-awareness as a human, but they've got more of it than fish, probably more than mice, more than some dogs, less than others... And they're all *varied*. Even with nearly the same experiences, born of the same parents, raised in the same puddle of kittens... (Hyperkitty, Baby Blackfell, McCavity... Three siblings, and Hyperkitty was a Servitor of Janus, while McCavity was a rather stoopid Servitor of Sloth. He spent a lot of time going "Huh?" Blackfell was more "normal.") (Self-conscious, no, self-aware, yes-to-some-degree. Amoral, definitely. They can puzzle out self and other, but right and wrong are beyond them. They are almost entirely selfish.) You can teach cats more about the universe and how it works than you can teach fish, I'd suspect. Maybe more than many birds. Possibly as much as some dogs, though not in a "teach tricks" aspect. [...] >Nonetheless, I maintain >that most of what pet-owners regard as "personality" is just hardwired >cognitive schema reacting to stimulus. Own a pet for several years before you claim that. Better yet, own several, so that you can see how one has no more behind its eyes than a tribble ("Julicat, you are so *stupid*!") while another can tell the difference between strangers and Mom. If all I'd ever had was Julicat, I'd think they were no more than hardwiring too. Sort of like what angels thought of humans, when humans first showed up, probably... >And yes, the same is true of baby >humans. Whether or not there is some gap we jump when achieving sentience, >or if it is just a matter of degree (the "subroutines" branching out until >you have so many infinite possibilities that the distinction between >sentience and simulated sentience becomes irrelevant, as with what one >might imagine from an enormously sophisticated Eliza program), I do not >know. From what I remember, it's a degree. Here's a "sapience" test -- does the creature alter its own environment for its own benefit, and as a species, do different ones get different answers to that? Cats may not use tools, but they don't have opposable thumbs (which is a good thing -- Hodgie rattles doorknobs already!). Hodgie will use his paw to drag someone else's food bowl towards him. Tuffy (the one usually losing her food) stares on in annoyed bewilderment, hesitantly bapping Hodgie on the head, but doesn't think to use her *own* paw to drag the thing back. Huntington, Julicat, and Choplicker can all open cabinet doors. They had learned how to navigate a door that swung both ways, too -- first they pushed it open, then they learned how to *pull* it open. Smarter than some kids, who would rather try a tantrum first... Now, back to In Nomine... Isn't this one of Lucifer's arguements about humans? That they aren't fit to be served by such intelligent (and the average celestial *is* smarter than the average human) and generally superior creatures as celestials? How do celestials think of humans? Smart pets? Hardwired in so much? They share a certain amount of language, so they don't have that barrier to deal with. But do they think human babblings are as restrictive as a gorilla's sign language? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 15:21:12 -0500 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Cats At 2:13 PM -0400 3/4/98, gibsonc@NKU.EDU wrote: >You're arguing over what is basically PETA and you thought geometry was >off-topic? Hey, I'm *trying* to put it into IN perspective.... What are Soldiers and servants, if not pets? - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 20:50:58 +0000 From: Kevin Walsh Subject: Re: IN> Cats On Wed, Mar 04, 1998 at 03:21:12PM -0500, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: > At 2:13 PM -0400 3/4/98, gibsonc@NKU.EDU wrote: > >You're arguing over what is basically PETA and you thought geometry was > >off-topic? > > Hey, I'm *trying* to put it into IN perspective.... What are > Soldiers and servants, if not pets? > Tools? Toys? Furniture? (Sorry, wrong game.) To be honest, I think it's great. I'm not even having to intervene to keep it off-topic, and it was my throwaway remark about cats and Seraphim that started it all off. Ah...Essence. And interesting and occasionally factual tidbits. The reasoning behind my initial remark, incidentally, was partly due to meditations on one of my characters. But it came down to this. Seraphim are stereotypically aloof, obsessed with cleanliness, and neat. As are cats. Curiosity may also be a shared trait, but I think that might be pushing the stereotype of cats too far. (Is it?) And it's possible that there are some Seraphim out there without curiosity of any description, though I think it's unlikely. Also, traditionally neither cats nor Seraphim have a good opinion of humanity. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "as for their relations with others, that is a long story, but it can be expressed shortly and clearly by saying that of all people we know the Spartans are most conspicuous for believing that what they like doing is honourable and what suits their interests is just." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 16:11:15 -0500 From: Andrew Frades Subject: Re: IN> Cats Just because this thread has been going on now for such a long time I feel I must add my two cents. First off, the ability to teach an animal tricks has nothing to do with intelligence. Dogs learn tricks well because they are pack animals, cats do not because they are not. Okay, that out of the way on the sentient/sapient topic: the whole sentient thing is not from Trek, it existed long before that, even in the time of A.E. Van Vogt and Cordweiner Smith. The reasoning, if I remember it correctly was that there is a separation between emotion and feeling. Having an emotion is something pretty much anything can do, feeling (i.e. being aware of the emotion) is something that only certain higher life forms can do. These higher self-aware creatures are Sentient. Sapient is not (with this reasoning) the best way to say self-aware. Sapient points more toward reasoning which has nothing to do with self awareness. Andrew Mercurian of Outdated Science Fiction ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #658 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.