Board Thread:False Info and Speculative Discussion/@comment-24732895-20140910035928/@comment-6383956-20140921035011

Paul, now you're calling me a liar -- which is ABSOLUTE, TOTAL, COMPLETE bullshit. Did you not write this post:

"She was, presumably, a fully functional 9 year old when she disappeared. She kept her human intelligence while in coyote form. She was a very smart coyote. Why then should she suddenly be a stupid, feral, human?

Animals are smart. An animal's instincts combined with a human brain would be substantially smarter."

Because it says it came from you. And that's the post I first replied to in this thread. It was an utter, appalling misinterpretation of Anne's post. (At least, her post in this thread, which is the only one I saw and the only one that shows up on her user page.)

The only dishonest thing I've said was that I was done with this thread -- though I did believe it at the time. I didn't think I'd be called a liar immediately following that -- which, ps, pretty damn offended about that if you hadn't noticed.

But since I've already come back, I may as well continue....

Jester, while you're totally right about Pavel's opinion of structuralism, you've only got half of Pavel's stance on fiction theory in your post. He doesn't disregard fiction theory in its entirety, he rejects certain theories within fiction theory. (He is, after all, a fiction theorist! Welllll, a literary theorist! I guess it depends on who you ask what his occupation is. :P) Pavel insists that fictional worlds are complete, autonomous universes unto themselves. What that means, mainly, is that what is given to us about the world is considered true and everything else is secondarily informed by our knowledge as the audience -- going back to an example from earlier, if we're told "there is a blue deer" that is a true statement within the fictional world (disregarding unreliable narrators, in this instance, for simplicity's sake). There is no comparison to the real world, or any other fictional worlds. There's blue deer in this fictional world. In arguable fact. But, to know what that is, we're bringing in our own knowledge -- we know what the color blue looks like, and we know what deer look like. Nothing in the text has overridden that information. However, if the text also tells us that deer have a single horn made of pearl, the information we know from our world is irrelevant because that's not what deer look like in the real world. (The reverse is true too -- when Scott nearly got trampled by deer in the first episode, we knew they were deer without Scott having to shout "Deer!" because that's what we know deer look like in our world.)

This article (which I've cited previously) explains the same thing, if you go down to where it's talking about Pavel.

I definitely need you to cite a source for the idea that fiction theory does not apply to world's vastly different than our own, because I've never heard that or read that anywhere before you said it in this thread. And, as I said, I've seen fiction theory applied to a number of worlds that are definitely not like ours -- Tolkein's Middle-earth, the universe of "I, Robot" (the book, not the movie), almost anything Joss Whedon ever wrote....

Anyways, like I'm saying with Malia, we have enough to know that the information we're bringing to the table from our world obviously doesn't work for this fictional universe. So we can toss that real world information in the trash -- but then we have no information about her situation. And as I said before, whether or not that's a problem for you is a matter of personal opinion, but that's factually what's happened. You can't explain her situation or legal standing any more than I can.