[Marsha] The operative word is 'fictitious'. [Arlo] If you believe this, you wouldn't be schizophrenic over whether or not SA, Krimel are Arlo are variations of a theme. You'd judge each fiction on their own merit, according to the value each present. They'd all be fictitious, and worrying about "honesty" and this and that would disappear, as "honesty" relates to some "realness" that transcends the fiction. You wouldn't feel "deceived" if SA's body turned out to have female parts since both "SA" and whatever "in real life" personae that shares her/his brain are both "fictions". How could there be "one real gender" they should have?
Unless you're now gonna say "there's one real fictitious self" one should "be honest in a conventional way" about? Its easy to say you think "selves" are fictitious, Marsha, but so far everything you've posted points to the opposite view. The "fiction" includes the ideas of continuity over time and continuity across contexts, or its hardly a fiction, is it? The separateness of "Marsha" and "Arlo" is a fiction, and whether or not they share a bodily host wouldn't matter to you. Each would be valued as the only reality they can ever have, as avatars in a social world. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
