Empedocles the necromancer-- what do you think of this quote?

[Kyriakos]

“Linking different pinnacles in manners that variate
the stories do not end in a sole way”

*more down to earth translation would be: "Uniting opposite pinnacles in different ways, a story never can end in a single path (taken)"

Empedocles of Agrigentum

(“Κορυφὰς ἑτέρας ἑτέρηισι προσάπτων
μύθων μὴ τελέειν ἀτραπὸν μίαν&#8221

The above is the start of a 23-page story i finished some time ago, and it seems to be decent (got positive feedback by some people i respect).

The story is titled (translated) "Yet another way", and its main meaning is that (as in the quote by that ancient philosopher) it appears impossible to speak of anything needed to be said in a single story, in a single way, but that is all which is viewed as bounded and distinct.

Empedocles was an interesting person, who in some stories is also said to have resurrected someone who died. Then again the comment to those theories already in the ancient era often was along the lines of 'x claims this is what happened, but he is known to like such tales and would be fine with arguing that indeed a human just fell from the sky'

*

You are invited to gape with awe as our wise men demonstrate the power of (cis)Eleatic Philosophy.
And you can also say what you think of the quote by the sicilean dreamer

 

[Borachio]

As it stands, the quote makes little sense to me.

It's just a collection of words, imo.

As far as I know, "variate" isn't a verb, but the sentence quoted seems to use it as one. (Actually "variate" as a noun isn't a word I use in any case).

But even replacing it with "vary" or "variegate" doesn't help me either.

And what "pinnacles in manners" might mean escapes me. And "ends in a sole way"?

Whoever translated that didn't have English as their first language, I'm thinking.

It is nonetheless quite interesting, if only because it makes no sense.

Is it deliberately nonsensical?

"Linking" and "the stories" I'm fine with, on the other hand.

 

[Kyriakos]

Well, it can be replaced by 'vary' i suppose Or 'differing'...

In my view it meant that there is no story (myth) or text which can lead you in one way to the needed extent of what has to be described. Eg truth, i suppose.

 

[Kyriakos]

As it stands, the quote makes little sense to me.

It's just a collection of words, imo.

As far as I know, "variate" isn't a verb, but the sentence quoted seems to use it as one. (Actually "variate" as a noun isn't a word I use in any case).

But even replacing it with "vary" or "variegate" doesn't help me either.

And what "pinnacles in manners" might mean escapes me. And "ends in a sole way"?

Whoever translated that didn't have English as their first language, I'm thinking.

It is nonetheless quite interesting, if only because it makes no sense.

Is it deliberately nonsensical?

"Linking" and "the stories" I'm fine with, on the other hand.

Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me for my poor english



The pinnacles are literally tops in the original text (they can be tops of mountains, or edges in general, or metaphorical). Manners was just meant to mean 'way' without epeating 'way' (atrapos in the original) again, given it is not repeated in the original.

Maybe a more down to earth translation would be: "Uniting opposite pinnacles in different ways, a story never can end in a single path (taken)"

 

[Leoreth]

Still not clear about the metaphor here (this may be an issue with translation and idiomatic use of words).

What are the pinnacles? Stories? Story elements? Does uniting mean something like combining elements/ideas to form a story?

Isn't the story the path? I'm not sure what image "ending in a path" is meant to invoke. Wouldn't it be clearer to have a path ending in a destination?

 

[Borachio]

Well, that's a lot better! Except that "pinnacles" doesn't help the reader understand what you might mean. It just seems to obscure your meaning. Which of course might serve your purpose well for all I know.

 

[Kyriakos]

Those philo guys meant to obscure meaning. It also fends against arguing

The pinnacles can be seen also as distinct points (i mean going by Eleatic reasoning, if stuff have size they must have an absolute edge too, and a mountain has that in most directions in its pinnacle). If one feels like it they may just see the phrase in a quantum-phycics way, that things are not ever tied conclusively in a way which can be bounded in single narrative

 

[bhavv]

Its all gibberish. Nonsensical gibberish, typically philosophical, I.E. Nothing but pure gibberish.

Gibber gibber, gobber gabber.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Culture philistine sybarite

 

[Leoreth]

The pinnacles can be seen also as distinct points (i mean going by Eleatic reasoning, if stuff have size they must have an absolute edge too, and a mountain has that in most directions in its pinnacle). If one feels like it they may just see the phrase in a quantum-phycics way, that things are not ever tied conclusively in a way which can be bounded in single narrative

I'm not familiar with Eleatic reasoning, so I don't understand how either this or quantum physics are directly related to stories.

 

[bhavv]

^Culture philistine sybarite

Gobber gabber glib glob glab.

Oh look, I'm a philogopher too!

 

[Kyriakos]

I'm not familiar with Eleatic reasoning, so I don't understand how either this or quantum physics are directly related to stories.

Well, to put it into context:

The phrase is written by Empedocles as part of one of his poems (some philosophers used to write in verse, Parmenides also did so). In that part of the work Empedocles repeats to his intended student that there is no way to speak continiously about the realities of the cosmos, cause they are not linear but like trying to join different mountain summits by moving in a singular stride. "Mythos" (and story) is used as a synonym for his narrative to his student. The same meaning appears elsewhere in that work

 

[Leoreth]

Oh, that makes sense I think.

 

[Borachio]

But why is he a necromancer?

 

[Kyriakos]

But why is he a necromancer?

He is said (in some version of accounts of his life) to have resurrected a woman that had died, and study necromancy along the way, and so claim he is now a god

Apparently he also wrote that people who die may turn into animals, and on that basis argued for the banning of animal sacrifice, cause "sons cut the throats of their own dead father" and so on. He was a cool thinker

(and almost as much a mystic as Newton)

 

[Zelig]

“Linking different pinnacles in manners that variate
the stories do not end in a sole way”

Poor writing.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Treat your burn, mang, i've no interest in anger-posting

 

[Zelig]

^Treat your burn, mang, i've no interest in anger-posting

I'm referring to the quote. "Poorly said", or whatever.