Metadiscussion upon being noted
Logan5:
Oh, sorry. I took your comment to be about their explicitly bringing this thread to Brian's attention. After Juls had already indirectly brought it up.
As far as Mr. Hungerford, I suspect that he did what he thought best in the situation. If a reporter for a small-circulation alternative paper could track him down, so could the Orphanage's adversaries.
I had always considered the possibility that Brian was a fellow traveller. At one point I sent him a characterization of gen:18 in relation to one of the ads. I'm sure someone intimately familiar with the text would find my analysis puerile or possibly even blasphemous. Anyhow, for whatever reason, Brian filtered it. You'd figure people that honour such notable scientists/mathematicians (who apparently tried to discern God's plan from studying His _works_) wouldn't mind logical scrutiny of their _literature_.
As far as erudition :
Yes, the Orphanage does seem to have some educated members. But intelligence is only one of nature's tools. Why painstakingly pick the lock when you can smash the window? Oblique strategies, such as proper application of genetic algorithms, could get us into places thought to be inviolate. I was really hoping that having this thread on the FTMB would draw some intuitives, such as, errr, dowsers or RV'ers into the fray.
Re: RAW & Illuminatus.
Gee, I had noticed the common threads. I totally missed the temporal relationship with the publication date of "Illuminatus!"
The problem is, that such a tome makes a admirable smokescreen for many things. Whether "I!" is directly relevant or not is a mystery to me. And just in case RAW is reading this -- if this is all a wind-up, I will make sure you feel my displeasure! (Incidentally, I had read an amazon review one time that pointed out that "I!" meta-programs the reader by forcing them to switch mental frameworks every few hundred pages. Do we see similar efforts happening in the ADW ads? From what I see, the ads are all trying to force the reader into one distinct mindset.)
A final note: I don't think have all the answers here, just in case anyone is put off by the sheer volume of my ramblings. I'm just throwing off ideas to try to get others involved in the discussion here.
Logan5:
Oh, sorry. I took your comment to be about their explicitly bringing this thread to Brian's attention. After Juls had already indirectly brought it up.
As far as Mr. Hungerford, I suspect that he did what he thought best in the situation. If a reporter for a small-circulation alternative paper could track him down, so could the Orphanage's adversaries.
I had always considered the possibility that Brian was a fellow traveller. At one point I sent him a characterization of gen:18 in relation to one of the ads. I'm sure someone intimately familiar with the text would find my analysis puerile or possibly even blasphemous. Anyhow, for whatever reason, Brian filtered it. You'd figure people that honour such notable scientists/mathematicians (who apparently tried to discern God's plan from studying His _works_) wouldn't mind logical scrutiny of their _literature_.
As far as erudition :
Yes, the Orphanage does seem to have some educated members. But intelligence is only one of nature's tools. Why painstakingly pick the lock when you can smash the window? Oblique strategies, such as proper application of genetic algorithms, could get us into places thought to be inviolate. I was really hoping that having this thread on the FTMB would draw some intuitives, such as, errr, dowsers or RV'ers into the fray.
Re: RAW & Illuminatus.
Gee, I had noticed the common threads. I totally missed the temporal relationship with the publication date of "Illuminatus!"
The problem is, that such a tome makes a admirable smokescreen for many things. Whether "I!" is directly relevant or not is a mystery to me. And just in case RAW is reading this -- if this is all a wind-up, I will make sure you feel my displeasure! (Incidentally, I had read an amazon review one time that pointed out that "I!" meta-programs the reader by forcing them to switch mental frameworks every few hundred pages. Do we see similar efforts happening in the ADW ads? From what I see, the ads are all trying to force the reader into one distinct mindset.)
A final note: I don't think have all the answers here, just in case anyone is put off by the sheer volume of my ramblings. I'm just throwing off ideas to try to get others involved in the discussion here.