The Luther Scrolls

Discussions about John Norman, and his books.

Have you heard of the Luther Scrolls? DId you ever read them? If so, what did you think of them?

Never heard of them.
2
3%
Never heard of them.
2
3%
Didn't he hammer them to a church door in 1517?
1
1%
Didn't he hammer them to a church door in 1517?
1
1%
Heard of them or seen them, never really read them.
1
1%
Heard of them or seen them, never really read them.
1
1%
I read (some of) them. Good information in them.
8
11%
I read (some of) them. Good information in them.
8
11%
Read (some of) them. I felt they were so-so.
11
16%
Read (some of) them. I felt they were so-so.
11
16%
Read (some of) them. They were quite bad.
10
14%
Read (some of) them. They were quite bad.
10
14%
Read (some of) them. They ruined SL Gor.
2
3%
Read (some of) them. They ruined SL Gor.
2
3%
I read the Luther scrolls, therefore I am.
0
No votes
I read the Luther scrolls, therefore I am.
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 70
User avatar
Mynerva
Posts: 661
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:22 am
SL Name: *****

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Mynerva » Wed May 22, 2013 4:10 pm

Glaucon wrote:I kind of figured I would come back to find quite a few posts by Kaitlin after my last post, containing a barrage of arguments, most of which I notice with regret are weak and full of sophistry.



Oh stop lying Glaucon - you do not regret it - you are delighted..

:innocent:
Freiheit ist immer Freiheit der Andersdenkenden.
Rosa Luxemburg
User avatar
Kaitlin
Posts: 3057
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:16 pm
SL Name: Kaitlin Eiren
Caste: RL ATM
Contact:

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Kaitlin » Wed May 22, 2013 4:41 pm

Glaucon wrote:I kind of figured I would come back to find quite a few posts by Kaitlin after my last post, containing a barrage of arguments, most of which I notice with regret are weak and full of sophistry.


FYI. I haven't even begun to tear down these garbage essays for the misinterpretations they contain. I responded to Keyser with a few examples similar to his own experience with the "slave paces". I added a few and then deleted them since you have proved post after post it won't matter. They will still be an awesome guide to RP in comparison to other more terrible sources real and imagined. :lol:

Before, in Online Gor (including SL, in the past), people had limited means of communication, and, sometimes, limited access to the books. A good number of the people drawn to it had not read (many of) the books. And a portion of those that did may have been impressionable. Meanwhile, there used to be less of a distinction between IC and OOC, and the Masters (and Mistresses, I supposed) often had an air of 'being right' because they were... well, the free. People clearly talked about Gor in smaller circles. Often with one or maybe a few 'experts' acting as the supreme authority on 'reading Norman'.


:lol: Pure BS. It amazes me that for a person who clearly states how relatively new they were to Gor when it was presented in SL and how little exposure you have had to other platforms and sources created at the time of the Luther Scrolls how you manage to pull such inaccurate generalities out of nowhere. In previous platforms the players were far better read. I'd venture to say at least half the players had read more than one book so they didn't need a Gorums to explain why the Luther Scrolls were full of shit.

Something else I find strangely odd is how you aren't tapping on the lifestyle essays of your favorite writer of RP Guides or rather his forum posts...many of which have been edited since they were originally posted but there is still enough there for entertainment.
Some people create their own storms, then get upset when it rains.

Once upon a time... Kait
User avatar
Kaitlin
Posts: 3057
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:16 pm
SL Name: Kaitlin Eiren
Caste: RL ATM
Contact:

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Kaitlin » Wed May 22, 2013 4:46 pm

Mynerva wrote:
Glaucon wrote:I kind of figured I would come back to find quite a few posts by Kaitlin after my last post, containing a barrage of arguments, most of which I notice with regret are weak and full of sophistry.



Oh stop lying Glaucon - you do not regret it - you are delighted..

:innocent:


I'm not sure he realized how transparent he is being but I figure eventually he will actually go and give them a good read rather than waiting on someone to tell him all of the things wrong with the Luther Scrolls. Something tells me he is one of those guys taking slaves through their "paces".
Some people create their own storms, then get upset when it rains.

Once upon a time... Kait
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Glaucon » Wed May 22, 2013 5:10 pm

@ Minerva: I do like a good debate. And when an oponent lines up easy targets, I might relish in demolishing them, but really... I like the rhetorical stuff less that I like honest discussion. And I prefer the pleasant and reasonable side of Kaitlin. (She does have one!)

And on to Kaitlin's arguments:

LOL pure BS


Ah. Yes. Arguments.

Something tells me he is one of those guys taking slaves through their "paces".


That something... would that be the part of you that really needs to WIN an argument and figures any silly sneer that is miles of the mark is worth posting?

It amazes me that for a person who clearly states how relatively new they were to Gor when it was presented in SL and how little exposure you have had to other platforms and sources created at the time of the Luther Scrolls how you manage to pull such inaccurate generalities out of nowhere. In previous platforms the players were far better read. I'd venture to say at least half the players had read more than one book so they didn't need a Gorums to explain why the Luther Scrolls were full of shit.


I do get that you are affronted by my audacity. That I'd dare talk about something I didn't witness myself, first hand. But I dind't say anything about how many of the books they had read as compared to SL Gor. And it is beside the point. My point was about earlier days SL Gor vs. now, really. And frankly, I am surprised you seem to disagree with my, since I have made the point before, several times and you seemed to agree with it then (or at least I am sure you never disagreed with it, before, so I am starting to suspect that you may be a little peeved at me over disagreeing with you... just a little :o.O: ).

Personally, whatever BS you see in my argument, I am fairly SURE that if you had to weigh the two 'causes for onlinism' (1. The Luther Scrolls vs. 2. The Lack of a Medium where onlinisms could be exposed for the benefit a wider audience of people with little knowledge of the books), the second one would recommend itself as weightier. A fairly obvious argument presents itself: Back in SL Gor in 2006, you had the Luther Scrolls, and no forum about SL Gor. Now, you STILL have the Luther Scrolls AND forums about SL Gor... what changed? That is your most likely cause. What stayed the same? THat isn't.)

But on to the arguments you presented prior to your last few posts:

Pushing this as some type of legit RP guide is pretty hilarious


I am glad you are ROTFL-ing. But it is not an actual argument.

I'll admit I never expected to be having this conversation at this point in time.


Irrelevant.

I understand you believe they are a plus for RP as a guide but I'm not sure how that can be true if you expect users not to take what is said literally.


+4? On what scale? If that is 'great', then it is you doing your straw man thingy again, as usual. Pelo mentioned that already. (No one said they were 'great').

Now... sophistry asside...


slave paces

You are only right in that he didn't call them slave paces. You are only right in that he didn't call them slave paces. He certainly advocates that these would be questions asked of most slaves so no this is not someone elses NC fantasy but straight out of the Luther Scrolls kajira basics and it is simply wrong


So... he didn't call them slave paces, after all. But you say he introduced slave paces anyway, even if he didn't call them that?

Now, as for these being asked of 'many' slaves: clearly, they are asked of slaves, in the books. So, you might object to 'many' as 'conjecture' if Norman didn't mention anything about frequency(though not very odd conjecture at all. But you go on...

This training is mentioned in the books but the idea that every slave would go through this training is a flawed belief.


And there you go straw-manning Luther. He didn't say EVERY SLAVE. He said MANY. So, once again, you are objecting to stuff he didn't say.

Not to give the context surrounding these questions pushes the idea that it should be a standard expectation not to mention it was true in practice in his own chatroom where this was supposed to serve as "guidance" on how to roleplay Gor.


So, whilst saying you didn't know Luther well, you do claim to know what he said in his chatroom. Which is fine. But how is that relevant to the question of whether the LUTHER SCROLLS are crap or not? We are not debating what Luther said ages ago. If he told you he was a Stalinist, I'd believe you, but it would also be irrelevant.


MY Master

And this is where having first hand knowledge of how he expected his guide to be put into practice comes in handy. He did indeed expect all slaves to refer to their owners as "MY" master in his own chatroom. The rule is poorly written so yes he does get to take the hit for all of those he believes he is educating who use this as the source for such a ridiculous onlinism.


Again... how is what you saw him do or say many years ago first hand matter? We are talking about the Luther Scrolls. There is no way to check your testimony, so it would be a bit of a problematic argument in a 'scholarly' discussion, but in this case, it is really irrelevant, especially since you proclaimed him a laughing stock long before there even was an SL-Gor, so his chat-room could hardly have 'corrupted' SL Gor. The Lutther Scrolls don't say that a slave MUST call her or his owner MY Master, and that is the end of that.


Slaves greeting everyone individually in specific order

Exactly where did you debunk it? I missed that entirely.


Many pages back. I looked up the tiny little bit that MIGHT refer to the onlinism. And there, he DID mention that slaves would typically great an important person like an Ubar first, or an Ubara, and then their owner. But that is about all he says. Nothing about there being an exact order to the greetings between castes, or men and women, or about a slave having to say hi to everyone individually. The first bit you MIGHT object to as conjecture, if Norman never said anything like it (though it is pretty much common sense, it is what people usually do. A soldier isn't going to salute to a sergeant and then to a captain and then to a general if he meets them, normally.) It might be MORE than just fairly logical conjecture (which you might indeed call interpretation presented as fact) unless there would be 'statistical' evidence to support this found in the books (of slaves generally following this pattern), in which case he probably still should have mentioned the 'evidence' for his conclusion, I guess. Would a slave really great their city's Ubar first, before greeting their owner. I have no idea... maybe one could browse the books for instances of such a situation in the books and see if Luther was right or wrong.

But regardless of that... clearly the scrolls didn't postulate anything CLOSE to the very silly practice I have observed in SL Gor (I have even seen slaves make their excuses for making a mistake, like "((Forgive me, I should have greeted you before I greeted the Mistress, Master Blacksmith))" THAT stuff clearly isn't in the scrolls.

The bit you quote after would be the passage I was referring to, the passage that you claim was the source of the onlinism (which would be odd, because there were already elaborate rule-cards about how a slave should greet, saying something different (first the owner and then specifying lots of other details about who should go first and such) out there.


Kajira's in Taverns (A previously unknown onlinism)

Second, when a kajira enters the tavern, she does not need to seek permission or perform obeisance. She should just quietly walk to the serving area and kneel until she is needed. This is partially intended to promote the flow of role-play as massive greetings can be distracting. Third, a kajira should seek permission to leave the tavern. First, she should consult her owner. If the owner is not around, she should ask any other free person present.


Yes... I DO see something to object to. The 'shoulds' make it clear that he is indeed writing a bit of an RP guide, here, probably for instruction for his own RP place. He clearly isn't summarizing Norman, in this bit, but speaking as 'instructor'. Not that anyone could really be confused about that, but yes... this is his conjecture. But what he says is actually not that odd at all. It is probably exactly what a well-meaning tavern-owner in SL would offer as advice to a new slave working in a tavern in SL. I really don't see the birth of an onlinism here.

I am sure you can find some other bits that are closer to RP 'instruction' than to a summary of what Norman says in the books. However, the fact that some small parts of the stuff in the scrolls is his own conjecture (sensible or not) and some even his own personal 'instruction' on how best to RP rather than an actual summary of what Norman says doesn't mean that what he says is an 'insidious' onlinism or any onlinism or even the SEED for any onlinism at all.

And it is indeed a tiny part. (And so far, like I said, all having to do with slavery, which is probably the stuff he was dealing with most in that chatroom, I am guessing). A MUCH LARGER part of the Luther scrolls are simply filled with summaries of the stuff in the books, that really aren't bad at all. AND AN EVEN LARGER part of the luther scrolls is filled with stuff about Norman's sources, the stuff that seemed to have inspired him, which I believe is probably the best elaborate stuff ever written on it, and on his philosophical inspiration, for which the same can probably be said.

So... unless someone pulls another rabbit out of a hat, for the time being, I am forced to conclude that the claim that his scrolls are mostly crap that introduced scores or terrible onlinisms into SL Gor is really not based on much by way of fact at all. Really, it is something on an onlinism in it's own right, I think.
User avatar
Kaitlin
Posts: 3057
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:16 pm
SL Name: Kaitlin Eiren
Caste: RL ATM
Contact:

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Kaitlin » Wed May 22, 2013 5:45 pm

Glaucon wrote:So, whilst saying you didn't know Luther well, you do claim to know what he said in his chatroom. Which is fine. But how is that relevant to the question of whether the LUTHER SCROLLS are crap or not? We are not debating what Luther said ages ago. If he told you he was a Stalinist, I'd believe you, but it would also be irrelevant.


Actually we are debating what Luther said ages ago and I am familiar with the rules of his chatroom as well as the typical makeup of the participants and their expectations. These essays are not new. It is pretty clear you don't realize what these "essays" are/were. They were a RP guide for his chat room. Why wouldn't that be relevant. We aren't talking about something he said outside of these essays but how he used these essays much like sim rules are used currently.

Glaucon wrote:
Something tells me he is one of those guys taking slaves through their "paces".


That something... would that be the part of you that really needs to WIN an argument and figures any silly sneer that is miles of the mark is worth posting?


Actually the remark wasn't to "win" an argument. I'm pretty sure I'm right which explains fully why Keyser would seek more information after being called out on this practice with some amount of chagrin and you on the other hand think its OK because he said "most" (there is a difference in many and most) without putting in the caveat it was part of formal slave training. Two very different mindsets.

I think you also missed entirely that I intentionally tossed out a few familiar and minor issues many people would have encountered in RP. We could of course get bogged down in the disconnects on the Warriors, Medicine in Gor, Castes, some of the myths of Gor and just about every essay he wrote but can't we just agree it is a waste of time or at least admit you want someone to trot this out for your own education. Figure it out yourself or reject it completely. I find it amazing that Caranda told you pretty frankly there are "inventions" and your response was "OK that's fair" and yet you are still going on and on and on.

Caranda wrote:The problem with the Luther scrolls is that while they are actually mostly correct in their summary of the books they also do contain much material which was just invented by the author.

If that invented material was clearly identified as such there wouldn't be a problem but it's not. Luther doesn't cite to the books for either genuine material or his inventions so you have to know the books pretty well in order to be able to spot what is true to the books and what is not. So for many people the Luther scrolls can be a bit of a trap. That's what has caused them to have a poor reputation among many Gor fans.

This isn't a new issue or something specific to SL Gor. People were having this debate in html chat forums a decade ago.


It still comes down to one of my earlier posts to you.

Kaitlin wrote:I hate to disappoint you Glaucon but the lone "ruined gor" vote isn't mine. I think player ignorance deserves that award and as long as I have 1 to 2 sims that fit my ideals for the genre it isn't ruined.

I am also not enumerating the flaws because it is such a complete waste of time to try to reach some arbitrary bar of what is utter crap :lol: . It has nothing to do with you being the anti-poster. You liking the Luther Scrolls isn't exactly a surprise. I consider you mainstream Gor and they love them.


I'm not expecting a win. I'm expecting you to remain on your side of the fence and I'll remain on mine. I have limited to no exposure to players in SL who use this as a valid RP guide so I really don't care that it is received well in mainstream gor.

Here is the bottom line. If I don't believe roleplayers should read 32 books to RP in SL Gor I certainly don't believe they should invest in the number of books required to make it pretty clear these essays are flawed and expose the erroneous concepts they introduce into RP. I'd rather any reading they did be to enhance their own RP and not fact check irrelevant essays.

I'm not being insulting or facetious when I say that I rely on the opinions of far better read players than you on what is and isn't crap in these essays. This discussion pre-dates SL Gor and has had far more text than I'm willing to donate. I should probably add in "fans" of the books since that would exclude Pelo.
;)
Some people create their own storms, then get upset when it rains.

Once upon a time... Kait
User avatar
Pelopidas
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:49 pm
SL Name: Dion Diavolo
Location: North Greece

The Luther Scrolls

Postby Pelopidas » Wed May 22, 2013 6:34 pm

Caranda didn't say that they are inventions, Caranda said that they are mostly correct on summarizing the books but they add invented material that isn't clearly identified.

You do have a problem with accuracy it seems.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
User avatar
Kaitlin
Posts: 3057
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:16 pm
SL Name: Kaitlin Eiren
Caste: RL ATM
Contact:

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Kaitlin » Wed May 22, 2013 6:39 pm

Pelopidas wrote:Caranda didn't say that they are inventions, Caranda said that they are mostly correct on summarizing the books but they add invented material that isn't clearly identified.

You do have a problem with accuracy it seems.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


Are you nuts? Blind? How is "he invented material" different than "inventions" assuming we skip right over her saying "inventions". I'll say something I never expected to say to someone who postures as being so "well read". You need to work on your reading comprehension.


Caranda wrote:The problem with the Luther scrolls is that while they are actually mostly correct in their summary of the books they also do contain much material which was just invented by the author.

If that invented material was clearly identified as such there wouldn't be a problem but it's not. Luther doesn't cite to the books for either genuine material or his inventions so you have to know the books pretty well in order to be able to spot what is true to the books and what is not.
Some people create their own storms, then get upset when it rains.

Once upon a time... Kait
User avatar
Pelopidas
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:49 pm
SL Name: Dion Diavolo
Location: North Greece

The Luther Scrolls

Postby Pelopidas » Wed May 22, 2013 6:56 pm

Dismissing his work, as you been doing, based on the argument that they are packed with invented material is quite different from saying that they are mostly accurate summaries of the books but they have invented material that is not clearly identified and that can be problematic.

The first argument is completely dismissive, the second argument allows for possible productive use of his work. They are at least, as Caranda said, who your self touted her credentials, mostly accurate summaries of the books.

So, someone looking for mostly accurate summaries of the books could go and read the Luther scrolls, no?

And what if someone wants to read about Normans influences from Plato's Polity, should he start from Luther? You never really did answer me that and I'd love to debate Plato, despite my poor reading comprehension, with you.

For the last time, nobody denies they have problems, we could argue about the degree of problems they have, but keep throwing his entire work out of the window, as you been doing, looks kinda fanatic.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
User avatar
Kaitlin
Posts: 3057
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:16 pm
SL Name: Kaitlin Eiren
Caste: RL ATM
Contact:

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Kaitlin » Wed May 22, 2013 7:05 pm

Pelopidas wrote:For the last time, nobody denies they have problems, we could argue about the degree of problems they have, but keep throwing his entire work out of the window, as you been doing, looks kinda fanatic.


Mostly accurate summaries with MUCH invented material. Amazing what the addition of one word you keep leaving out does for a sentence.

It has little to do with being "fanatic". Most onlinisms have some kernel of truth or are "mostly accurate with much invented material". That doesn't stop them from being what they are. The same applies to these essays.

This idea that I need to moderate my opinion of his "inventions" is a bit ridiculous given the reasons they came to be in the first place no longer exist and haven't for some time. The books and/or countless quotes and discussions are available and even you yourself have stated the material really isn't rocket science. This was true even in the early days of SL Gor so no I don't find them to be valuable to RP then or now.
Some people create their own storms, then get upset when it rains.

Once upon a time... Kait
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: The Luther Scrolls

Postby Glaucon » Wed May 22, 2013 7:27 pm

TL, RD: @ Kaitlin: You offer nothing but insults and arguments from authority.

Full post:

@ Kaitlin: You feel that whatever Luther got up to in his chatroom matters in a discussion about the Luther Scrolls. I disagree.

You see the essays are RP rules to his chatroom. I agree that might be true for some bits. But only for maybe 2 percent. I don't see how him exploring similarities between Gor and Barsoon or Cognitive Naturalism or the inspiration of Gorean city names would be a part of that.

You say I argue against your statement that the Luther Scrolls are utter crap because I engage in the onlinism of taking 'slaves through their paces' and am defending the Luther Scrolls because of it. Clearly, you are being rather stupid there (which anyone bothering to read my posts can see). You call me a liar, effectively. Which I would call very bad manners.

We could of course get bogged down in the disconnects on the Warriors, Medicine in Gor, Castes, some of the myths of Gor and just about every essay he wrote but can't we just agree it is a waste of time or at least admit you want someone to trot this out for your own education. Figure it out yourself or reject it completely.


I am not sure it would be WRONG for someone claiming to be such a great authority on Gor to educate others on a forum like this. Getting 'bogged down' in such things seems to be the sort of thing this place is all about. You keep on implying you know a thousand 'wrongs' in those scrolls, but if you won't discuss them, I am left to discuss those that you DID mention (of which there is far less left on closer examination).

Of course, you don't HAVE TO discuss anything you don't want to discuss. But I would ask you to put your money where your mouth is. It is generally considered bad manner to insist you know more, to put yourself up as an authority figure that has knowledge others do not, and then to refuse to discuss it, but to keep on going on about how others know nothing, that they are full of shit, are a joke, that they are completely wrong, that you are right. In literally DOZENS of posts. As if you wanted to drown the debate in authority arguments.

If Caranda feels what I said here is wrong, she can speak for herself. You can keep bringing her up, using her as a shield, another one of your authority arguments. But from as far as I could tell from her relatively short post, her position on the Luther Scrolls was far less extreme than yours.

I'm not being insulting or facetious when I say that I rely on the opinions of far better read players than you on what is and isn't crap in these essays.


You ARE being insulting or facetious in general, but not just there.I believe you when you say that those 'experts' generally say that the Luther Scrolls are crap. But it is just another authority argument.

I am not against authority arguments (Arguments from authority are fallicious in deductive reasoning, but they can make sense in inductive reasoning). I am sure that 'the experts' are usually right. But when I am questioning something, examining it, such as here, the Luther Scrolls and whether they deserve the rep they have, I am not content with you saying 'people that know more about the books than you say they are crap'. I want to SEE or be shown they are crap. And if I look and ask, and I can't see it, and others mention stuff that turns out not to be much by way of evidence, I start to DOUBT the validity of the authority argument, to doubt whether their expertise leads them to valid conclusions.

And in this case, it is hardly quantum mechanics. I have the books (well, most of them) and the Luther Scrolls. I am sure these great experts are all beautiful minds with vast supplies of Gor Lore that I can only dream about, but... ah, come on. The evidence is right there, and it isn't too complicated. Hardly rocket science or climate change.

If you feel that the right way to a challenge to the communis opinio is an authority argument, to just say "It is true, because all the good people say it is.", then I can only agree to disagree. We already KNEW that most 'experts' didn't think much of the Luther Scrolls. That would be that 'bad rep' I mentioned in the OP. If every self-proclaimed expert LIKED the scrolls, they would hardly have a bad rep.
Last edited by Glaucon on Wed May 22, 2013 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Return to “Chronicles of Counter Earth”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron