About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Thursday, June 12, 2008 - 11:46pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

"How does the Objectivist theory of concept-formation handle this prickly development? "

I don't know, but I guess it means we turn our attention to more pressing concerns, such as "Was Snape Right?" and "Is Dumbledore Gay?".



Post 1

Thursday, June 12, 2008 - 11:54pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

This delightful "genetic" mutation (the defect is more likely one of development like siamese-twinning than a truly genetic one caused by a change in the DNA sequence) is only a yearling. It will be interesting to see how its horn branches as it ages. Goat unicorns have been created by manipulating the horn-buds in utero. This roe deer is apparently a fluke similar in nature to a two-headed snake.

Post 2

Thursday, June 12, 2008 - 11:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Snape? I am not familiar with the controversy. Please elaborate. As for Dumbledore, I thought he was dating that Teletubby.

Post 3

Friday, June 13, 2008 - 4:55amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When I first read the headline of this, outside of RoR, I was interested to see what genetic mutation would cause a horse to grow a horn.  Alas, was not to be.

And, not to split hairs (10 pts if you get the pun) but, technically a horn is a boney growth with a covering of keratin.  Deer have antlers, which have no protein covering, just the boney growth.  Granted, the antler does have a covering of hair and skin when it first forms.  But, that wears off, after a few weeks.

Although, unicorn has a better ring to it than uniantler.  He's a cutie, isn't he?

(Edited by Bauer Westeren on 6/13, 4:58am)

(Edited by Bauer Westeren on 6/13, 4:59am)


Post 4

Friday, June 13, 2008 - 1:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I believe the Unicorn started out as the Alicorn did it not? It was given some non-horse like features like cloven hooves, a lion's tale, and a beard on its muzzle to name a few. It wouldn't surprise me that such mutations became the template for a legendary creature, which through time and people's need to create tall tales converted a curiosity into something else.


-- Brede

Post 5

Friday, June 13, 2008 - 2:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Whatever its origin, the notion of the unicorn was given impetus by the tusk of the Narwhal, the only structure in nature that fits the physical description of the single straight horn.

I have not heard of an "alicorn." The word unicorn comes from the Latin unus meaning "one" and the Latin corn- meaning "gay horse." (From the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson.)

Post 6

Friday, June 13, 2008 - 8:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It's related to the earlier heraldry and myths. Some of these myths relate to a story that the alicorn was an untamable beast that would kill anyone that came near it until the Virgin Mary, who was able to approach it and even caress it. Of course, it's a myth, but the point of it was that the alicorn at the time of the myth was a pagan symbol for virility, so it was one of the many steps that Christians took to integrate into the pagan world. :)


-- Brede

Post 7

Friday, June 13, 2008 - 9:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Snape? Alicorn?

According to wikipedia, alicorn is the material comprising the unicorn's horn. Can you give any other reference?

And I'm still wondering what a snape is.

And while we're at it, does anyone know why Jewish men wear yarmulkes, and is there any connection with the caps worn by m^slim men and certain Catholic clergy?

Post 8

Saturday, June 14, 2008 - 1:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"Unicorn" is the latinized version of the Greek "monoceros". The Greeks coined this term to describe a common style of art from the Middle East, one which, when depicting oxen, cattle, buffaloes, etc. from the side, invariably used a rigid and stereotypical pose, with only one horn per beast showing, (the other being hidden behind the first.)

Often used for monumental art, such as bas-reliefs on stelae depicting the wealth and achievements of kings, or on the sides of temples, this was a very common style of representation in the portions of Asia and Africa the Greeks were familiar with. They contrasted it unfavorably to the realism and liveliness of most Greek work.

-Bill

Post 9

Saturday, June 14, 2008 - 3:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Bill, the term monoceros used that way is simply adjectival, and could apply to any one-horned animal so depicted. It is the species name of many animals, including the narwhal, the rhinoceros beetle and even the sand shrimp. And, of course, Marco Polo reported the Javan Rhino as a "unicorn." And unicornis is the species name of the Asian rhino, but not the Javan.

Do you know anything of the origin of the notion of a white animal with the body of a horse, cloven hooves, a mane, and that happens to be one-horned? I am unaware of such a distinct beast being depicted in Asian temple reliefs. Wikipedia says that mediaeval unicorns were typically goat-like in appearance. A one-horned oryx might fit the bill.

A good case has been made for the origin of the gryphon myth in the fossils of the protoceratops which are common in the Mongolian steppe. The beaked and shielded dinosaur resembles a four-legged animal with a bird's beak, and its neck shield is usually found dislocated as two plates that could easily be misinterpreted as wings. The gryphon was supposed to inhabit the Scythian steppe. Whence the unicorn, I know not.



Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 10

Saturday, June 14, 2008 - 11:02pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ted,

My understanding is that the Middle Eastern murals, friezes, etc. came first. Then the Greeks called the style monoceros, and the Romans translated this to unicornus. Much later, Medieval Christians who had no clue about the original images thought that the words in the books referred to actual animals, rather than to depictions of animals. Finally, Atlantic sailors confused the issue further by bringing back Narwhal tusks and claiming that they had seen unicorns.

So the whole thing is the result of a big confusion, eventually bolstered by fraud.

-Bill

Post 11

Saturday, June 14, 2008 - 11:47pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks, Bill. I thought you were making a weaker purely etymological argument, and not saying that there was a genetic connection between the oriental images and their later misinterpretation by the mediaevals. The question of the horse body with cloven hooves and mane still remains, but then I might as well ask you to explain the blemmyae.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 12

Sunday, June 15, 2008 - 1:44pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ted,
Snape is another character from Harry Potter.  The one portrayed by Alan Rickman.  Sorry if this comes as a disappointment to your eager curiosity.


Post 13

Sunday, June 15, 2008 - 2:10pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Well, it's an answer, at least. Having read Tolkien at 11, I am afraid Rawling is unpalatable for me at 40. The movies are good (as background chatter) since you don't have to pay attention. The kind you watch after Hitchcock, while you cook dinner.

About what was Snape right or not right?

Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.