!8ball

sure, i guess
I won’t recommend it
I would say no
search within yourself or somethin
(magic conch shell) – maybe someday
(magic conch shell) – follow the seahorse
(magic conch shell) – I don’t think so
(magic conch shell) – no
(magic conch shell) – yes
(magic conch shell) – try asking again
you’re stressing me out >.>
it is a good day to do what has to be done
the law requires i answer no
nothing but air, heads up

>.> don’t ask me that
José Arturo Castellanos Contreras (San Vicente, El Salvador, December 23, 1893 — San Salvador, June 18, 1977) was a Salvadoran army colonel and diplomat who, while working as El Salvador’s Consul General for Geneva during World War II, and in conjunction with a Jewish-Hungarian businessman named György Mandl, helped save up to 40,000 Jews and Central Europeans from Nazi persecution by providing them with Political Asylum (Salvadoran nationality).
yes and no
yesn’t
yosh
ogey
yoshi

the answer is logically equivalent to the continuum hypothesis
affirmative
negative
roll a die, if you roll a 2, then yes, otherwise, no
not a chance
many bothans died to bring you this information but the information didn’t arrive
as sure as the sun rises
this is a fundamental truth which has governed the development of the universe
as long as you have enough rubies
See 1 Nephi 13:22
~yes
it do be like that
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
no no no no no no no
yes with the axiom of choice, no without
nunca jamás
no~

!curse

You have been cursed, generically.
You have been cursed with a sinus infection.
subscrb fro free free iPad (real)
free (unlimited) vbucks tutorial . mp3 download 240p punjabi subtítulos en español
People will always ask you things that they could answer with a 2 second search.
Your playlists are decidedly not fire and anyone who listens to them will tell you so.
You have to watch this stream RIGHT NOW!!!
You are now left-footed (your right foot is as awkward as a nondominant hand).
You are aware of how many licks it took to get to the center of every single tootsie pop. Your brain will bring this information up in an inconvenient fashion.
All pasta and noodles that you try to eat are now penne. Even things like ramen.
The Lich personally calls you a nerd.
Your faucets will always leak.
You are cursed, but also double-cursed to never know what the first curse is.
Your KDR will always be embarassing.
You’ll have to live with the consequences of your actions.
Blankets will warm you up too much. No more cozy.
You will feel your skin as if it were a skintight suit over your flesh.
Your nose will be so long that kissing will become impossible.
Your teeth will have the flexibility and texture of noodles, but the same durability.
Your living space will have an infestation of ankle-high sonic ocs.
Someone in your life will ensure you end up tied to a train track in a cheesy villain kinda way.
Hippity hoppity your tongue is now my property.
The IRS will repossess your kneecaps. For you and you alone, this will be legal.
You can only sleep with the fishes. Figuring out the air situation is on you.
Go live in Nebraska. (not necessarily a curse)
You forgot to cook with the vegetables you bought while trying to be responsible.
Your burger king has foot lettuce.
Your eyebrows can grow as long as the hair on your head and grows quite fast.
كان عليك ترجمة هذا.
pay $5 to unlock your curse.
Your pet rock is having second thoughts.
You are not forklift certified.
bonk bonk bonk bonk
Your footsteps naturally squeak.
It is a terrible night to have a curse. (it was going to be a good night to have a curse.)
sentenced to League of Legends.
Shadow the Hedgehog will whisper in your ear at inopportune moments.
Garfield thinks you are the lasagna.
You will slowly transform into Eggman. Is this really a curse Kappa
You hav 2 speak in uwu
Catspeak. You know, like, nya.
Kirby’s gonna eat ya :3
anime
a rat is gonna climb on your head and ratatouille you
Your stomach feels wobbly :<
You have received left pizza with none beef.

RE:The term “mormon”

For when this comes up.

I am what is most commonly known as a mormon, a member of a minority/nonmainline Christian denomination. Mormon is not a correct term (outside of a limited number of historical events and objects). Mormonism is never correct. To refer to people, Latter-day Saint(s) is correct. For the institution, it’s the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

See this style guide for more info on how to use the terms exactly. Latter-day Saint and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will always be fine in their respective contexts. I ask you to use these terms rather than “mormon,” “mormonism,” “the mormon church,” or any variation thereof.

It’s easier to remember the name if you understand it’s two parts:

Church of Jesus Christ: Very early in the history of the Church, the entire name was Church of Christ. We follow Christ and base our religion on Him. However, there are plenty of different churches with the same or similar name. Second, we believe in continuing revelation by God and that God requested that the following phrase be added:

of Latter-day Saints: Latter-day Saints is based on two things. Of the periods mentioned in scripture, we live in the latter-days, that is, late in time based on what prophecy covers. Saints is just what we call followers of Christ, because we seek and, by the power of Christ obtain, sanctification (saint and sanctification are related etymologically).

Why “mormon” isn’t great

In the following sections, consider why the term is not accepted. Issues with the term include false association, misinformation/discrimination, and denial of Christianity:

False association: Multiple groups are called “mormons,” of which mine, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, is the vast majority. Most of these groups separated over 100 years ago and have no influence or relation to each other any more. However, because we are all called “mormons,” people think the activity of any one of these groups applies to all. This has been most problematic because fringe “mormon” groups have garnered international attention in recent years, for their involvement in crimes such as polygamy and child abuse.

Those groups are not associated with us, and we really would like not to be wrapped up with them. Because many of these groups are in Utah, which is majority Latter-day Saint, whenever these crimes are discovered, many of the criminal investigators and prosecutors on the case are in fact Latter-day Saints. Because these groups practice isolation, gathering enough information to support a warrant is difficult. We don’t know that all of them engage in criminal behavior either and people don’t deserve criminal investigation merely for isolation or nonstandard cultural practices. But the point is, when these big cases were discovered, Latter-day Saints were just as appalled as everyone else. We are not “protecting” them; they avoid us too.

There are also some radical altright groups that try to use the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to justify their actions. Properly speaking, they are more ideologically aligned with sovereign citizens than us and rely on cherry-picking and stripping statements of context. Their beliefs have been condemned time and time again, whether it’s antiimmigrant sentiment, antigovernment sentiment, or white supremacism. They don’t listen to the Church. They’re on their own stupid path and we’d get them to cut it out if they actually cared about the Gospel and weren’t just using it to justify their power-tripping. We believe in upholding the law and that everyone is a child of God and a recipient of His love.

Misinformation and discrimination: Latter-day Saints have been victims of false information, exoticization, and alternative facts since the beginning. As many early Latter-day Saints were immigrants to the US, they were victims of intense antimigrant sentiment in the US. There’s also the general hatred for non-Protestant religions rampant in the country at the time. Then our opposition to slavery caused a lot of problems, then our opposition to attacks on Native Americans, etc. We’ve never been popular and yellow journalists have always been happy to profit off that. There’s a good chance you have heard misinfo that dates back to the 1800s and was never corrected. We were literally attacked by the US Army on claims of treason and the government didn’t even bother to verify them first (at least that became a scandal for Buchanan).

Just a handful of stuff my family and I have dealt with: claims that we kidnap children, that we have horns, that our leaders are part of a great conspiracy dating involving Nixon and Eisenhower to form a new state called “Mormonia.” My father has been sued and had challenges to his bar membership solely for being a Latter-day Saint (and while the challenges were easily defeated, they still cost us time and money). That’s some of the more ridiculous stuff, but we’ve been the subjects of deliberate exclusion and hostility. My first experience was when I was 10 or so. It’s also the reason why I don’t necessarily bring up the subject often, because I cannot assume that a random person will treat me as a human if I say I am a “mormon.” Or, more commonly, people will treat me immediately as a villain or undesirable, even if we’ve been civil up to that point. When I see the term “mormon” online, I immediately experience anxiety because, 95% of the time, it’s to call us cultists, insist we’re idiots, spread sensational claims about us, and so on. This happens even in fora completely unrelated to us: many people feel completely at liberty to hate us, even in circles that recognize persecution of other religious minorities is inappropriate.

Denial of Christianity: the term’s original function is to claim we are something besides Christian. Now, I am not remotely interested in any argument to the contrary; I have heard many and not a one was compelling. I will leave it at this: I have spent my entire life studying the words and life of Christ. All I really want in life is to be His disciple and changed by Him, based on the power of His Atonement. In the Church, “we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins” (2 Ne 25:26). I would like to think we deserve to call ourselves Christians.

History of the term

The word “mormon” itself is in fact a name: Mormon was an indigenous American historian who lived in the 4th Century. He compiled, wrote, and edited the majority of the Book of Mormon. The remainder was either written by his son after Mormon died to genocide or was part of primary documents included by Mormon in the Book of Mormon.

Latter-day Saints don’t really use the term internally (except as a reflection of pressures discussed in the next paragraph). If I’m with other Latter-day Saints, we use some variation of Latter-day Saints. It came to be a label for Latter-day Saint when hostile groups began to use it as a pejorative. While the term is not as explicitly pejorative as it was in the past, it is certainly not divorced from the pejorative sense (and I have had ample encounters with the term being used pejoratively).

Latter-day Saints are in a position where the term “mormon” is much, much more common, in no small part thanks to the aforementioned yellow journalists. So, when dealing with others, we’re kinda forced to use the term or people will have no clue what we’re talking about. Even with the issues of misinfo. Most people are kinda just in the position where they know the term, have picked up a mix of true and false things, but don’t necessarily hate us. It’s also worth noting some Latter-day Saints don’t particularly mind the term.

There have also been periods where we attempted to reclaim the term “mormon.” We are not doing so now. As mentioned, we believe in continuing revelation from God. He recently said that He did not approve of the term “mormon,” that He had given us a name, and that we were to use that name.

Thus, we’ll often mention that we are called “mormons,” but that the term is improper and ask people to use a different name.

Final Thoughts

As a general rule, not even just with respect to us, please use endonyms, not exonyms. Endonyms are names that groups choose for themselves; exonyms are names given to a group by outsiders. Example: you may have heard the name Anasazi used to describe the indigenous Americans who lived in places like Mesa Verde. Anasazi is an exonym, given by the Navajo, that means ancient enemies. Not really a proper thing to call a group. In this case, we don’t quite know what the right endonym is, so we’ve had to settle with calling them Ancestral Puebloans.

Anyway, endonyms > exonyms. Latter-day Saint > mormon. I’d invite you to follow this principle as much as you can. Even with historical groups, people across the planet, and the dead. It’s not just about using endonyms when someone asks you to do so, or when you’re with someone who’s a part of the group in question. It’s about accuracy and truth in ethnic/religious/historical relations.

Using endonyms is about helping yourself and others understand people on their own terms. When you know a group by an exonym, that should be a red flag that this group doesn’t even get to control their own name. Groups like this tend to be victims of serious, enduring misinformation and often serious prejudice. Whether it’s Latter-day Saints, Romani, Inuit, or any other group, switching from an exonym to an endonym is a valuable chance to learn more about one of the peoples who share(d) this world with you (and expunge false information you may have absorbed).

I’ll end by repeating the request, please just don’t use the term “mormon.” I do not like it. It stresses me out. Even for Latter-day Saints who are ok with the term, many’d prefer Latter-day Saint. In any case, take care and thank you for the consideration.

Originally written on Jun. 26, 2022. Small update on Feb. 20, 2023, mostly to add the discussion on exonyms and endonyms.

Sapient AI

Just writing this down quick after seeing a number of articles on artificial intelligence. I think an AI would probably be sapient if it could actually understand language (or that sapience is right in that area), but I also think understanding language is computationally impossible :/

Convergent Mistlands

A finite ring ideal with accomodating physics characterized by its unusual methods of entry and naturally misty environment.

The defining feature of the Convergent Mistlands is a blue-to-white moss. This moss grows in carpets across swathes of the Mistlands and facilitates the generation of mist. Mist generated by the moss has a unique property. When the mist becomes adequately dense, entry into the mist will transport a person into, out of, or around the Mistlands. The shifting boundary of the Mistlands is one such location.

As an ideal, it is possible to enter the Mistlands from many points outside it. Indeed, the Mistlands can be accessed from many rings. People from outside of the Mistlands will almost always leave it eventually; this is because objects nonnative to the Mistlands, including people, have a chance of leaving the mistlands each time the mist teleports them. They will usually track a small amount of moss with them outside of the Mistlands. The moss will then grow, if possible, in the new location. If this moss receives enough water to produce a dense mist, the moss patch will serve as a new entryway to the Mistlands.

Relatively small for a ring, the Mistlands feature a homogenous geography and ecology. The Mistlands are probably a created ring, based on its homogeneity and use of magic to simulate normal life-supporting environs. However, no potential creator is known.

The Mistlands are terribly wet. There are many lakes, rivers, deep aquifers, glaciers, wells, etc. The moss is an essential part of its water cycle, reintroduced a great deal of water into the atmosphere. The whole region is mountainous and stony. Soil is thin. The glaciers are magically maintained; a certain quantity of water becomes snow. The region is not cold enough for snow otherwise and outside specific snowpacks, there is no snow to be found.

Weather is dominated by mist and rain. While the mist often thins or opens large gaps, the sky is never clear altogether. The sky is magically illuminated during the day, but at night, a buoyant, bioluminescent species resembling a balloon replicates the effect of stars.

Two species of shortgrass appear in the Mistlands: one white and one green. Trees are rare. Every tree species in the Mistlands grows as an isolated cluster of trees that form a single individual. Both grasses and trees compete for resources where moss doesn’t grow, generally wetter areas, including lake edges, intermittent rivers and lakes, and the like. The stony landscape and poor sunlight mean most flora does not grow too large. Brush is not common.

Fauna are small. Terrestrial fauna are mostly burrowers, with a few grazers and animals that live in tree patches. One large predator-scavenger exists, which is somewhat reminiscent of a long-legged yak. It uses brute force to kill prey, but mostly scavenges dead grazers. Aquatic life is more varied, with many amphibians, salamanders, and fish.

Notable Locations: 8Sanctuary

Ring

A ring is, so to speak, a universe or a complete world. First, a ring is a set, so it contains something. Matter, energy, void, anything like that. In addition to the something, it has a physics, which are the principles under which the something acts, relates to itself, changes, etc. The something is the raw material, while the physics governs what happens in the ring.

In summary, a ring is a set of something with a governing physics.

Our universe, our ring, has a lot of something and a rather nice physics that allows us to exist. As for the knowledge of other rings, we mostly know about rings similar to ours. It’s hard to know about rings where matter as we know it can’t exist. It’s not even a question of survival; how could you send a probe or visit a place where atoms can’t exist, the matter is fundamentally different, or the physics would cause us to instantly fly apart?

Consequently, almost every ring described will have a physics that is close enough to ours. You can safely assume that there will be things different about it, like the science might work different, or the humans might need different internal organs to survive, magic might exist, etc., but fundamental concepts like “time moves in one direction” and “2+2=4” will still be true. Many rings’ physics would only be distinguishable from ours if you know advanced physics. Not important for day to day living, but possibly important if you want to make sure your organs will still work if you move there.

Useful Notes

List of Rings

  • I choose the term ring instead of universe because universe is a really incoherent term across scifi. It’s a loose adaptation of the mathematical concept of a ring, a set of objects with two operators comparable to addition and multiplication. The set is our something and the operators are our physics.
  • A ring may be infinite or finite. A ring need not be ring-shaped.
  • A ring’s something could just be nothing. This is an empty ring and is useless to consider in most contexts. No one lives in an empty ring, nothing happens in an empty ring, etc.
  • A ring can contain a ring. The contained ring would be a subring, while the container ring would be a superring. The subring may have more refined, complicated, or strict physics that don’t apply to the superring.
  • A ring is as extensive as its physics allows its something to go. Nothing can leave a ring by the ring’s own physics. However, a substance not native to the ring may be able to enter or leave it based on a higher physics from a superring. Even native substances may be able to leave a ring with the help from something outside its ring. This is referred to as closure.
  • Material trade between rings is important. While something might be physically impossible to create within a ring, it might still be able to exist inside the ring so long as it is created somewhere else (where it is physically possible).
  • Travel between rings is frequently possible and becomes more common as superring materials proliferate. For lifeforms, the outward appearance is usually preserved, while the internal organs may be refactored. Certain highly-accommodating rings are travel hubs, where magic allows the organ-refactoring to be done painlessly and the person can survive both before and after the refactoring. However, the rules for interring travel depend entirely on the rings and superrings in question and may only connect specific locations, involve arcane methods, or be otherwise obtuse.

Other World Concepts

  • An ideal is a type of subring, distinguished by a sort of capturing mechanism. If an object in the ring containing the ideal interacts with something from the ideal, then the object will also find itself within the ideal. That is to say, an ideal absorbs anything that interacts with it or its parts from anywhere in the broader ring.
  • Many things are almost closed, like planets: consider how escape from Earth was impossible until very recently. It certainly seemed closed. By this analogy, the pragmatic limits of a civilization are called a range. While expansion beyond a range is technically possible, it requires incredibly advanced technology for marginal benefits. A range is not necessarily the full expanse a species could theoretically reach, nor does a range need to have a clear boundary. As mentioned, a range can also expand as technology improves.

Recognizing World Type by Name

For interring societies, the type of world is often indicated within the name by prefixes, suffixes, or other modifiers. Place names are usually translated to represent the ideas the names are based off of in the original language. This avoids issues like unpronounceable names (if the name is even communicated through sound). Adding these modifiers to names helps mitigate repeating names somewhat and helps distinguish place names from words.

  • Ring: feld, rng, vers, dom
  • Ideal: ide, arche, arch, sur
  • Range: welt, velt, mundus, mundi, ran, ester, astr

Unusual Umwelten of Fodlan: Nabateans, Crest Beasts, and Edelgard

general, light spoilers for FETH, nothing to do with Three Hopes tho

Outline

I. Intro

II. Dragons

III. Crest Beast

IV. Hegemon Husk

V. Closing Thoughts

I. Introduction and Framework: Umwelten

For a long time, I’ve wanted to write about one of my special interests[1] as it applies to Fire Emblem Three Houses: umwelten. It’ll take a moment to set up since there’s some specialized vocabulary and some background concepts necessary to understand the whole situation, but, at least to me, the groundwork is beyond fascinating.

An umwelt is a term coined by biologist Jakob von Uexküll.[2] It’s a curious little concept lying underneath much more famous theories from people like semioticians like Heidegger and Bakhtin. Strictly translated, it means “environment,” but what it really refers to is the world that an organism creates by interpreting the stimuli received by sensory organs.

It is important to understand umwelten because physically speaking, before your or my personality/mind/voluntary will can begin to act, physical factors limit what we perceive and alter how we interpret. We can only act on data if we perceive it. A bat can act on all sorts of data we cannot thanks to its sonar; a tick cannot see and cannot build its worldview on sight (but it can build an umwelt using heat signals based on a sensitivity far more delicate than ours). There could be any number of senses that humans are incapable of, with data we’ll never be able to perceive (think about all the things you physically sense, through sight and hearing and taste and touch and smell, that a plant, or a jellyfish, living beings all, have no concept of, and indeed, can never contemplate). And, of course, our senses are imperfect: vision’s fuzzy, finite, imprecise, sometimes we missee things, confuse one thing for something else, etc. And a lot of those errors we never detect (because, most of the time, they don’t matter). Just like we never realize when we are correctly filling in the gaps in our perception, because most of that happens before the data is even presented to our conscious perception.

Not only do our bodies determine what raw data we possess, but they also influence how we interpret that data. Chemical signals can dramatically alter how we interpret things, like how McDonalds never tastes better than when you’re hungry, how adrenaline allows you to perceive some things with incredible accuracy but fail to perceive other things entirely, and how trauma can increase sensitivity or awareness to negative stimuli. The sophistication of our brains allows us to do things like detect lines, perform physical predictions, and distinguish rhythms and colors when many species can’t do any of these things, even when they are perceiving the light or sound or other stimuli that contains the lines, music, and the like. (I am deeply saddened by this truth because my dog will never understand why wrapping his leash around a pole limits his movement.) To say nothing of how memory and past experience also affect your interpretive framework.

So your umwelt is the world as you construct it, based on all your sensory abilities, limitations, filters, biases, etc. Your umwelt changes whenever you interact with anything, as you add new information and forget old data. Parts of your umwelt include your innenwelt, that is, how you construct yourself within your umwelt. Because, while we do have special access to information about ourselves, we are still perceiving most parts of ourselves in some fashion. Whenever we engage in self-reflection as is necessary to create concepts like “Identity” or “Self-Image”, we do so purely by using perception on ourselves. And not just our own perception, but we necessarily rely a lot on our perception of others and how we perceive others perceive us. This brings us to the final bits of vocabulary (which I probably won’t use but it’s good to have :>). When you perceive someone else’s umwelt, that’s an umgebung (it deserves a different name because you aren’t accessing their umwelt, the umgebung is just the parts of their umwelt that you manage to perceive imperfectly). Then, a sociosphere is created by the interaction of two umwelten. A sociosphere requires communication via signs to bridge the umwelten (these signs being everything from raw sensory data to spoken language to tone to body movements, each full of their own impreciseness, imperfection, and ambiguity, for good and ill). The signing process, that is, all communications of meaning, is semiosis.

As a final example, take a moment to consider the soles of your feet, the walls around you, or the palms of your hand. Your feet are touching something, possibly fabric or grass or carpet or wood or tile. There’s a whole lot of sensory data of softness, texture, shape, temperature. When you think about walls, most of the time I just imagine them as flat, but that’s not true at all. When I see a brick wall, I know it’s made of bricks, but I don’t observe the individual bricks at all. And despite the phrase “know it like the back of your hand”, how much do you actually know or perceive of your hands? The little platelike structures that compose your skin, the creases on the joints, the veins under the surface, the pores, the precise contours and shapes of your hands?

If you choose to focus on one of these things, you’re suddenly filled with new data and your world, your umwelt, is enriched and detailed. When you’re not focusing on them, they simply do not exist at all within your umwelt, because you are not perceiving them. They exist within the welt, the physical, unperceived world, but they don’t exist in your umwelt. Attention is important to prevent us from being overwhelmed by the sheer amount of data our senses provide, like the typically useless awareness of the taste of the inside of our mouth or the sensation of clothing against skin.

Between differences in sensory organs, chemical compositions, wills, and experiences, our perceptions are fundamentally different, not just from species to species but from individual to individual. You and I can never know what it’s like to be inside someone else’s head, not really, anyway. Empathy is somewhere between reasoned guesswork and outright projection.[3] The gulf between a person and a bat is not so severe as the distance between two people, but we never really know how close or how far we are experientially, linguistically, or physically. (This doesn’t mean empathy isn’t important or valuable, but it’s limited. See [1] for places where I talk about that in detail, but a discussion of the frailty of empathy and a subsequent reconstruction of empathetic action is well beyond the scope of this article.)

With the groundwork out of the way, let’s talk about three umwelten: that of dragons, that of crest beasts, and that of the Hegemon Husk. Note that this is speculative rather than concrete because this stuff is specific enough that you’d need authorial confirmation for it to have any authority. So, more questions and possibilities are raised than conclusions reached, but they’re fun questions and possibilities and you could do a lot exploring them in fanfiction and the like. (See [4] for stories that explicitly address stuff like this; it’s awesome.)

II. The Immaculate One and other Draconic Shapeshifters/Nabateans

A single creature with a composite umwelt, because it has two separate sets of sensory devices, united by a single mind interpreting the senses, but the inability to use both sets simultaneously. We can assume that dragons in human form have a sensory suite similar to humans in most respects.

Biologically, a dragon body takes much more energy than a human one, meaning it just doesn’t make sense to use unless it’s necessary. So what is it necessary for? I doubt dragon forms are dexterous enough for construction work, so that leaves hunting and fighting. This is reflected in Rhea’s nutty combat skills, from Hoarfrost to Miracle to Defiant Strength to Ancient Dragonskin. Draconic bodies are for fighting; human forms are for communication, living, crafting, i.e., all else. Social life.

This narrow purpose means that dragon bodies are likely to focus on certain types of sensory data, like hunger (because of how much energy a dragon body needs to maintain) and aggression (the body needs the mind to be on board with fighting when it is using this form). Dragons are probably more territorial or even conquering because they would need to be so in order to survive. Of course, they’re more than intelligent enough to resist these impulses, but it might be harder for them to resist these impulses in dragon form. A dragon form is probably better able to handle the peculiar cognitive burdens of combat, like intense stench, fear, loathing (both loathing others or the dreadful sensation of being loathed).

Note, though, that the Immaculate One’s mechanics suggest social cooperation might be physically built into the dragon form: the fact that Hoarfrost and Aurora Breath don’t damage allies and Sacred Power buffs allies means that the dragon form’s abilities are modified under the assumption that allies in combat are likely to be present. But these social components specifically may reflect Rhea’s own training, rather than innate physical qualities. While the dragon form likely elevates survival instincts, which are often antisocial, these social aspects repudiate the possibility that the dragon form is purely animal. (Crossing the streams, I note also that Nowi and Tiki can benefit from pair up while transformed too.)

In summary, a dragon’s umwelt may include much more threat information than a human one, with more stimuli being perceived as threatening. Survival information will also be elevated to sustain the body’s higher energy needs. Information irrelevant to the purpose of the dragon form is less likely to be incorporated into a dragon’s worldview as long as they are in dragon form.

How much that carries over to the human form is unclear. The mere existence of a dragon form might affect the human form’s senses as well, e.g., Rhea might get hungrier faster. There are probably ways for the body to communicate to the mind the need to shapeshift, attached to the processes of aggression (it could operate somewhat like adrenaline).

Other plausible differences between human and dragon forms include:

  • better sight (the Immaculate One has a range of 5, for instance) (but perhaps they use magic as a sensory organ; the Immaculate One has white, round pupils, which wouldn’t work well at all).
  • windsense: greater awareness of wind/wind currents thanks to wings.
  • physical insensitivity: scales and scale-the scales may not have the same level of detailed touch information as skin, and the scale of draconic bodies means that they have to filter out more sensory information to not be overwhelmed.

Plausible differences between humans and dragons (regardless of form):

  • cognitive capacity: this might differ between human and dragon forms, but also between human forms and genuine humans. Perhaps dragons have better pattern recognition or something.
  • lots of instinctual interpretive filters. Dragons probably have different microbiomes, gut systems, and all that changing what they can eat, what they like to eat, etc. And from there, that changes what smells they like, what chemicals or flavors are associated with “good” and “bad”, etc. E.g., maybe fish are really good for dragons and Flayn’s fishxation is more than sentimental.
  • Stamina & other physical abilities. Crests are innate to dragons. The fact that their human forms are combat-capable (and they don’t totally rely on dragon form for combat) means that even their human forms probably require more energy than humans and that combat in human form wasn’t uncommon. Otherwise, dragons would probably be quite physically frail.
  • Age and perception of time: there’s naturally a lot of debate over how “fast” different people or species might perceive time and it’s a subject quite resistant to empirical study. But I’d say it’s pretty reasonable to say dragons, especially long-lived ones,
  • Hibernation. Dragons can hibernate, but don’t have to. That makes you wonder what triggers hibernation, how they choose to do so, etc. Perhaps a dragon can just start overeating and that tells the body they’re about to hibernate.

The last note is dragon madness present throughout Fire Emblem lore. It wasn’t clear that dragon madness applies to the dragons of Fodlan until recently, when FEH had its forging bonds event that framed Fallen Rhea’s experience squarely within the domain of dragon madness. I actually started writing this before the Forging Bonds came out and I probably found the revelation a bit more exciting (in an academic sense) than most. What I’ve written here provides a purely biological explanation for dragon madness (as opposed to an ephemeral “dragons go crazy because old” that dragon madness has often been reduced to).[5]

As stated, it seems reasonable that the dragon form increases aggression, territorialness, decreases distress in combat, etc. The shift between this state and human state requires significant neuroplasticity, that is, the capacity for a brain to modify itself to adapt to different needs and circumstances. Neuroplasticity naturally decreases in humans with age and under high stress, i.e., the exact conditions that aggravate dragon madness. So, what dragon madness may represent is the gradual loss of the ability to revert and regulate the useful and productive cognitive qualities of dragon form. So dragons lose the ability to stop thinking and feeling as if they were constantly in combat and possibly in danger. In other words, the body approaches a state where it can’t exit its emergency mode.

Emergency mode, fight or flight, adrenaline-pumping, however you frame it, is incredibly taxing on mind and body. Focus and attention don’t work normally, there is a constant search for threats which involves a very specific type of detail-oriented perception (at the exclusion of other forms of perception and thinking), the heart, muscles, and the like work overtime, certain hormones and neurological subnetworks go wild, and so on. All very taxing, very tiring, very stressful. Plus, resources are devoted to survival-focused tasks at the expense of other functions, making it harder to perform normal, low-intensity tasks. That’s why it’s only used when necessary.[6] But without relief, the damage builds up from overworking the mind and body. As damage accumulates, the body and mind become less capable, and need to exert even more energy to function normally. And the victim is typically conscious of this decay, watching their capacities decline and losing their sense of control over their lives and actions. And, unless something interrupts the decay, it not only continues but accelerates. This is bad under any circumstances, but what is important about dragon madness is how it develops even in the absence of stress or trauma. Dragons are expected to experience this, no matter what they do, and despite their (assumedly) unlimited lifespans. Now, even in dragon madness, they are still people, but their umwelt is increasingly warped: they’re going to miss information that suggests things may be nonthreatening, they’ll miss details on all kinds of tasks, and they’ll be easier to provoke. The sort of information being missed also happens to be the sort that is often most helpful in mitigating stress and maintaining healthy worldviews and relationships. And, since this process does not seem to be strongly reversible,

III. Crest Beasts

The cognitive and perceptive state of crest beasts is probably quite similar to severe dragon madness, with some aggravating factors. First off, crest beasts are an imitation of dragons, what with how crests are ultimately draconic power. Crest beasts seem to undergo the same mental alterations as dragon shapeshifters, but where the negative effects are amplified. Humans are not meant to become crest beasts (meaningful insight, that one), and the dramatic shift in perception, emotional systems, and the like means that the human system is unprepared to experience the same things dragons experience during shapeshifting. For dragons, it’s built into them; for humans, it’s a radical, forceful, unnatural reconstruction of their being.

Some things to make it worse: First, the transformation itself is painful and intense pain is quite effective at blocking our perception of most stimuli. Recall how failing to perceive neutral or beneficial stimuli is one of the primary harms of dragon madness. Adding additional factors limiting perception means those harms will manifest more severely. Second, the human mind is not going to be ready to process information as it is presented to them by a crest beast’s body. Everything will look, smell, feel, taste, sound different. Some things will be too intense, other things will be conspicuously absent. This probably isn’t as severe or stressful or disorienting as, say, a person blind from birth receiving treatment to restore their sight as an adult, but that’s the sort of distress this is. Third, the process probably just causes straight brain damage. Nothing about it seems healthy. Fourth, crest beasts don’t have any of the moderating influences of natural selection or biology to make sure anything about them works properly.

So, crest beasts experience the worst parts of being a dragon, but all at once, with no biological safeguards or ameliorating factors. Checks out why they’d completely lose their sensibility in most cases or retain very little sense in the case of the most robust, like Maurice.

IV. Hegemon Husk

We know very little about the hegemon[7] husk, but it seems to be a recreation of nabateans using human material. I would put, biologically, the husk as a sort of midway point between crest beasts and nabateans. The blood reconstruction surgery Edelgard underwent with the double crest allowed her to become a shapeshifter and retain herself while transformed, much like a nabatean and quite unlike a crest beast. She is also able to reverse the transformation. I’ll also note that Fallen Edelgard, as depicted in FEH, is still very much in control of her faculties. She’s not mad, as the fallen characters often are.

The term husk does imply something is lost in the transformation.[8] If I had to guess at it, a lot of that applies to the physical level. Like the crest beast, the husk lacks all biological function and constraints. It is a purely artificial form, so questions like natural selection, adaptation, and fitness are off the table. I would assume the entire process is incredibly strenuous, if not ruinous, for Edelgard’s body. We can imagine that, as in the crest beast, the mental shifts are severe: as a human, Edelgard’s brain on the physical level is not naturally prepared for the change and subsequent increases in aggression. But as mentioned, she bears this well.

Indeed, the husk seems to exhibit everything about crest powers/shapeshifting more intensely than even nabateans. Consider the crest of flames weapon, with a whopping 27 range, as well as the ability to act twice. 27 range, even with a low hit-rate, implies a powerful perceptive ability (probably magical rather than purely physical, especially since her black irises and red pupils wouldn’t function very well as eyes).

This extremity of power, perhaps, is the best way to interpret the term hegemon as applied to the husk (even reading it as a husk of a hegemon is inaccurate, since Edelgard did not achieve hegemony in AM. Perhaps husk of a potential hegemon). Because, in the typical, political meaning of the hegemon, Edelgard isn’t a hegemon of anything at this point in AM. She does, however, represent the peak of physical might. The husk is at least on par with a nabatean, but also possesses twin crests. One last, but unevidenced possibility, is that Edelgard is manifesting only as a husk of her real power in that form. This type of highly specific, choice-and-context of language interpretation isn’t normally my speed, but given the lack of information about the husk, it at least gives us a bit more to talk about. Whatever the case, it’s odd that the only time the word hegemon is used in FETH is to describe Edelgard in husk form and in the much more context-appropriate title for Byleth in their Edelgard paired ending.

V. Closing Thoughts

Thanks for making it through. I hope at least part of the discussion was enjoyable. I’ll note that, while I haven’t relied too much on the vocabulary developed in the introduction, I think that discussion is still useful for foundational reasons, because it motivated this entire study, and it was underlying everything I wrote here. I did this for fun and hope it was fun for yall too.

An important limitation on the whole discussion: the study of umwelten and how our bodies and experiences color, limit, and define what we experience and how we construct the world is valuable. Both to better understand ourselves and others. It is not, however, grounds for vilifying or dehumanizing people by culture, experience, personality, or physical qualities. People and cultures have flaws, but in intelligent beings, our choices weigh much more than our physical differences (and I would say this would be just as true when comparing human and nonhuman characters). This is especially true when we intentionally observe, study, and accommodate these flaws in ourselves.[8]

Quickly, I want to discuss the nonphysical implications of the term husk. The other thing lost is that this is the only time that Edelgard genuinely accepts TWSITD’s influence over her body. It’s the culmination of the blood-reconstruction and the destruction of her family. It’s a last-ditch effort, after all her friends have been slain in previous battles and Edelgard is last person who can carry her vision forward. Edelgard’s final struggle in AM is a husk of what it was: even if she were victorious, TWSITD has expanded its control over her and the people she chose to fight alongside are gone. To drive it home, note how the hegemon husk has a skill called a Wilted Flower.[9]

This note is perhaps obvious, but if I were publishing this, there’s some stuff I’d fix up (like making sure to properly couch each statement as a potential interpretation rather than a how it is interpretation, but I’m not doing that much editing for free LOL). Took being unable to sleep as a good sign to finally finish this project/I’ve been sitting on this long enough that it just feels like it’s better to finish than keep holding onto it.

And most importantly, stay safe and take care yall. World’s crazy, but there’s a lot of good people out there and a lot of good you can do.

Footnotes

[1] If umwelten are something that interests you, I’ve written about it several times before but my favorite would be this: A Description of La Vida total. Pretty much anything on my site with the tag La Vida total is concerned with understanding others’ perception (and how, although it’s ultimately impossible, it’s a sacred and essential process).

[2] I think it’s tragic that there’s so much talk of semiotics, often without hitting on this core concept at the foundation of it all. Semiotics is essential for much of the good parts of postmodernism and especially understanding why modernist, enlightenment, and romantic thought were all kinda falling apart, i.e., why postmodernism became necessary. Alongside Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems and non-Euclidean geometry messing with mathematics, an understanding of umwelten makes some amount of postmodernism essential. And knowing this stuff helps navigate a lot of current issues and debates a little better because it inoculates you against some common intellectual traps.

[3] This didn’t fit in anywhere, but for your consideration: Sonder. As much as I love tangents, I don’t want to overdo it.

[4] If you like applying science and biology to fantastic species, I’d recommend Heterogenea Linguistica, Delicious in Dungeon, and, to a lesser extent, Land of the Lustrous. Heterogenea Linguistica focuses on how language would vary based on the physical capacities of fantasy races, while Delicious in Dungeon focuses on all kinds of ecosystems, interactions, sustainability, and all that. I’ve been loving them both. And Land of the Lustrous focuses a lot on the mind-body relationship in the context of gem-body people and how differences in body affect concepts like memory. Oh, and the anime Flip Flappers actually introduced me to the concept. Due to some development issues, like the loss of their head writer halfway through the run, the second half of the show is pretty shaky. But the first half especially is very clearly playing with and trying to understand the issues of umwelten.

[5] The explanation I favored most before (and it applies to any long-lived species) is that a longer life also means more opportunities for life-shattering trauma. This, of course, was an inadequate explanation for dragon madness, because people can and do recover from life-shattering trauma and dragon madness seems inevitable (although, who knows, maybe it’s not; there are so few dragons that humans are basing their understanding of dragon madness off of a handful of individuals, individuals they have a bad tendency of starting wars and genocides with).

[6] Several human mental conditions, like PTSD (and cPTSD even more), anxiety, and paranoia are possibly, a deregulation of the same process, that is, these diseases arise when the body feels like it is in danger constantly. My experience of cPTSD squares with this description of the condition, but as someone who is more an “involuntary expert” than an actual expert on the subject, I think it’s appropriate to emphasize that I don’t know that this is the precise mechanism for these diseases. It’s a plausible explanation and one I believe, but I am unaware of how rigorously the explanation has been assessed at the scientific level.

[7] Clearing up a misconception I’ve seen in the wild about the term hegemon, that it’s pejorative or negative or some such. Hegemony is a descriptive term, not a pejorative. Hegemony is often criticized because it’s dangerous, but hegemony of some form is typical (and possibly necessary) in any given societal arrangement. A functional government is always hegemon within its territory, for instance. Modern governance limits the danger of hegemony by breaking it up between competing groups, but these groups possess the hegemony of the state between them. There may exist other powers that compete or limit a hegemon, but a hegemon is dramatically more powerful than rivals. Rhea was hegemon: the dominant power in Fodlan, a single figure who stands at the top of Fodlan’s hierarchies (albeit a power in decline by all accounts, evidenced by the incomplete loss of influence in Adrestia and the weakened ability to invoke Fodlan’s armies for the Church’s purposes). Byleth inherits that title in most routes. Edelgard can be emphasized as a hegemon in Fodlan only insofar as she represents a new hegemonic structure, i.e., a hegemon besides the head of the Church of Seiros.

[8] I feel the need to mention this because people have used semiotics and observations about biology for several noxious philosophies. Racism, for one, especially since the theory was first developed in the middle of scientific racism’s peak. Or the argument that infants don’t deserve protection because they supposedly can’t express preferences (from Peter Singer, but also an idiotic claim on the facts).

[9] If anyone recalls what I wrote about Edelgard as an empath, part of that was that she seems a lot like what is described as an orchid child, i.e., a child who blooms with support but wilts without it (as opposed to more resilient children who have less extreme outcomes). Wilted flower checks out.

libertarian cycle

hate government services for being low quality oppose taxes gov programs lose funding gov programs become worse hate government services for being low quality

like, yeah, having money doesn’t fix problems, but not having money certainly creates problems

Census Guide

Censuses are efficient methods for summarizing a community’s organization and individual’s place within that community. This page explains some standardized terms used in these censuses.

The census represents a snapshot in time. Each census should be treated as simultaneous, unless otherwise indicated (e.g., a census in a historical setting). Naturally, characters will deviate from this snapshot in more or less significant ways over the passage of time.

Household: Gives an address. All entries below a written address without a new address written live at the same location. This also suggests living arrangements and is strongly associated with family groups. It may also include renters, roommates, etc., which is clarified by the Name and Relationship entry.

Name: First name first, last name(s) second, middle names given after a comma. Aliases, alternate names, differences between legal names and used names may appear in the character’s personal info page. The name used in the census is the name that the person themself or the respondent (typically the head of household) provides. This is an authorial census, rather than a diegetic one, so it is the name I use for them, though it will typically be the same as the one the character uses for themselves in their own mind. Same with article titles. (goodness, im just gonna make this complicated at some point, aren’t i? some character who’s choice of name is just the most inconvenient thing.)

Relationship: Indicates head of household or relationship to head of household. The “head” is determined by who owns the property (or its lease). In the common event of coownership, nonresident owners will not be treated as the head, multiple residents may be marked as head with additional relationship notes, or one appropriate resident will be arbitrarily chosen as the head (i.e., dont read too much into it).

Age: given in Earth years because that’s what you use. Why would I make some abstract system up just so it can mean nothing to you, you know? Age is calculated within relativity, that is, based on the individual’s specific experience of time. A year is adjusted for the appropriate sensation of the passage of time within a given universe. Separately, some universes accelerate or decelerate maturation (i.e., an individual may have experienced more or less time than typically corresponds to their level of physical and cognitive development), which is better reflected in AgeFrame.

AgeFrame: AgeFrame is used to report more meaningful information than a simple yearcount, due to differences in development between species, access to medicine, and so on. The person is placed in a category, such as “child” or “adult”, based on cumulative physical development and compared against the projected lifespan of the species under similar circumstances and with similar medicine. Some terms may have specialized or uncommon terms for development, e.g., a pupal stage.

Origin: Origin refers to place of birth. For many individuals, this can be where they were raised, but not always. An individual’s page may provide more information. Origin may also be described at different levels of scale, e.g., a nomad’s origin will be the region their people hails from, unless that culture attaches special importance to certain places. Same for someone who is not nomadic, but lived throughout a region. Origins in little-understood regions may be much broader in scope than in well-understood areas.