njc wrote:A good workman respects her tools.
Is this a reference to T&A?
Depends on which T and which A.
JPL, worse than 'peak' and 'peek' is either of them for 'pique', or the W that intrudes on 'ring the changes' and 'reckless', and escapes from 'wreaking havoc'.
Yes, and that's the remarkable part--that Merran can fight in counterpoint. And when I liken it, during a catch-your-breath moment, to her early training with her father, to something she reverted to in B1Ch1, it's an irrelevant distraction. Instead, simple levitation should set off fireworks that aren't there and elicit a cosmic rimshot.
That Merran survives a Home Alone battle, and how, with such limited tools isn't astonishing in itself?
Clearly the padawan has much to learn ...
A good workman respects her tools.
Yes, the writer must be intimate with her irregular verbs ...
And I see errors that slipped in! Okay, unless you're really hungry for something to review wait until about 23:00 Eastern time (Tuesday 04:00 Zulu time).
Edit: Changes made. Total about 4,500 words. Go ahead.
Edit: Title changed to Shogran's Waifs .
Okay, B2Ch7(provisional) is now up: Shogran and the Children. You may fire when ready!
I've a got two potloads of reviews to catch up on and a good load besides.
I'm not convinced about Melody and Drezdorf. Certainly you don't need to rearchitect it; you can allow their stories to remain untold until later, the way OSCard did with Bean. Let's get the Behira-verse before the public.
*Belly laughing on your review reply.* Yeah, we can't have inflation, can we? Besides, your work is so good my compliments might be faint praise.
Ish? Ish!
And the workers should have a nice thank-you dinner ... but who prepares it?
njc wrote:Think out loud. The questions represent positions that people have actually taken, and they are forced on us as a society whether we like them or not. Chew the questions, not the polemicist who forces them on you. Find an answer that cover them all and that you believe can and should be defended. If we can't answer them to everyone's satisfaction, the other guy wins--and you might not like what he is going to domwith that win.
The answer I threw out has rough-edges. It needs refinement before I can defend it in its whole.
The point is that any that definition you eventually arrive at will never be correct. It might stack up for you as an individual, but it will not unilaterally satisfy mankind as the definitive explanation ...
True of all philosophy. So ... we should stop asking?
Recondite
Think out loud. The questions represent positions that people have actually taken, and they are forced on us as a society whether we like them or not. Chew the questions, not the polemicist who forces them on you. Find an answer that cover them all and that you believe can and should be defended. If we can't answer them to everyone's satisfaction, the other guy wins--and you might not like what he is going to domwith that win.
The answer I threw out has rough-edges. It needs refinement before I can defend it in its whole.
I'll give you a flippant one--or is it? Someone who drags race into a matter where it dooes not belong.
More serious definition after that's chewed and spat out ... ...
Well, you can click on the little rectangular 'Find More Books' block to scan backward. And you're perfectly welcome to find something you haven't read/reviewed. (Did you do B1 Ch 40 & 42, or Ch 35 & 35, or Ch 64?)
But for now I need to clarify the battle a little. It's not that complicated, it really isn't ... but I keep writing it that way. (Amy, I grant you four minutes of snickering and another two of sniggering. Then back to work! 
)
Is a doctor a racist for conditioning a possible diagnosis of sickle-cell anemia on black African ancestry?
Is a company racist for making hair-care products particularly suited--or not suited--for the hair of people with black African ancestry?
Is a doctor racist for conditioning a possible diagnosis of Tay-Sach's disease on Ashkenazi (or Cajun, or French-Canadian) ancestry?
Is it racist to note that blacks in the USA are more likely to be murder victims than whites? Is it racist to note that blacks in the USA are more likely to be murderers? (Both can be explained by noting that this is principally an inner city issue--and that leads to more questions.)
When someone flees the scene of a crime, is it racist to report that person's skin color to those looking for him/her?
The answers depend on your definition of 'racist'. And that single definition should give satisfactory answers, and have satisfactory moral implications, for ALL the questions above--or it is no definition at all, but a label of convenience for whatever you care to impute in a given situation.
From in the wall of indigo he sallies forth at night, (someone write the next line ...)
Okay, everything is in the right place, or nearly. It needs another big edit pass. Right now it's around 4,400 words, and it's likely to stay in that ballpark. Some parts are near ready, but the places I've been splicing and dicing need serious editing. One more pass, maybe, and you can tell me if it's any good.
Summary: Merran and Jamen go to get the orphans--Shogran's Waifs--just as Shogran's rescue cavalry arrives on the scene.
I believe the'white lie' matter was explained by Thomas Merton in the opening of one of his books, probably (by my recollection) =Seeds of Contemplation=. "We must never use one truth to deny another," especially when the truth that would be denied is another's dignity or worth. (It would be best if we all based those things where we should, but we don't.)
There's still at least one impacted. I have a few other suggestions, but in general it's a biiig step away from the weaknesses. I'll try to get the suggestions up tonight but I really want to get the chapter done. I've been three weeks on it.
Student: Mr. Heaviside, your books are very hard to read.
Oliver Heaviside: That may be, but I assure you, they were very much harder to write.
Arithmatic on how much worse it is to cheat a colored man.
When saying that act A is a worse moral violation than Act B, you may be saying any or all of three different things.
You may be saying that A does more harm than B. You may be saying that A shows greater moral depravity than B. You may be saying that A leads the actor to deeper moral depravity than B.
You may be saying two of them, or three. Does their badness add? Does it multiply?
I suppose you can chide Atticus for using an arithmetic metaphor where it cannot literally hold, or be held to. But his error is no worse than that of the little Friar in =The Bridge of San Luis Rey=, and much less considered.
Misinterpretation of the 3/5ths compromise is one of the most insidious half-truths of our age. The 3/5ths clause did not take representation from blacks. It reduced the degree to which the =slaveowners= could count their =slaves= as bodies to gain representation.
I should have written that Atticus takes the world as he finds it AS THE WORLD HE LIVES IN. He tries to change it AFTER assessing it clearly and accurately.
Finch is taking the world as he finds it, not as it ought to be. But he's trying to make it at it ought to be, a world where nobody kills that mockingbird.
Doesn't this very discussion show that =To Kill a Mockingbird= is worthy of discussion?
