************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ Hi Pete,
I agree with those who have suggested that a discussion on whether the basic package should be called 'to be known' or 'to know' could be placed in an editor's note or commentary.
Opinion on which (if either) is more basic can change with a person's progress, and also according to the leg of the basic game they are currently in. I've been a 'must know' all this lifetime, so my first rash impulse might be to assert that knowing is all-important and creating things to be known is just a means to that end. But that would be a partisan opinion.
Each game package is a four-celled matrix formed from two dichotomies: active/passive and positive/negative. Since all the other games packages are lebelled by the active positive leg (to see, to reason etc) it appears logical to label the basic package in the same way. To know is grammatically an active verb, even though it's an inflow. To be known is a passive verb, even though it's an outflow.
Not that it matters, as long as a reader can follow the decisions an editor has made. I think the original division into Know and Be Known must be prior to any time stream, as time and individuation only began when games got going.
Cheers, David http://adarsajnana.wordpress.com/ On 18/08/2014 5:49 am, Pete Mclaughlin wrote:
************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ Hi all Ok we have had the debate. I need a vote. Would you buy the books in paperback if I changed the references to the basic goals package in the books from "to know" to "to be known"? Please respond with an email so I can total up the answers. Thanks Pete Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
_______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
