Fire is not a substance

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
Locked
User avatar
CPiGuy
Auron
Posts: 1070
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 8:19 pm
Location: Ames, Iowa

Fire is not a substance

Post by CPiGuy »

Fire is a phenomenon, or an entity, or a thing. Fire is not a substance.

"This thing" is a perfectly fine indicator that you should not be ashamed to use in your questions if, say, "phenomenon" would be too transparent. It is a good indicator for questions about fire with such a concern, because fire is a thing. Fire is not, however, a substance.

Mythology and religion writers/editors, please stop referring to fire as a substance.
Conor Thompson (he/it)
Bangor High School '16
University of Michigan '20
Iowa State University '25
Tournament Format Database
User avatar
Good Goblin Housekeeping
Auron
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:03 am

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by Good Goblin Housekeeping »

no I will continue to do so and couldn't care less because given the nature of myths involving fire it's clearly treated as a substance since the people telling those myths did not understand the nature of fire

your take is bad and wrong kthx

thank you for reading my essay
Andrew Wang
Illinois 2016
User avatar
CPiGuy
Auron
Posts: 1070
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 8:19 pm
Location: Ames, Iowa

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by CPiGuy »

i look forward to your tossup on the planet venus that uses the indicator "this star"

but more seriously that's a reasonable point i just think indicators should be accurate to modern understandings of things because it is important that players know what is being asked for
Conor Thompson (he/it)
Bangor High School '16
University of Michigan '20
Iowa State University '25
Tournament Format Database
User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

wang, please submit a tossup on whales to CO with the identifier "these fish"

i will give a neg 20 to any science players who protest
Will Alston
Dartmouth College '16
Columbia Business School '21
User avatar
Good Goblin Housekeeping
Auron
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:03 am

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by Good Goblin Housekeeping »

CPiGuy wrote: Sat Mar 27, 2021 10:14 pm i look forward to your tossup on the planet venus that uses the indicator "this star"

but more seriously that's a reasonable point i just think indicators should be accurate to modern understandings of things because it is important that players know what is being asked for
If someone wanted to ask about something, such as, let's say, the luminiferous aether, or the hypothetical element of the "aether" I think it would be perfectly reasonable to call it a 'substance' even if the modern understanding of either of the two is 'they don't exist' and thus in spite of being hypothetical substances are not substances and similarly I think anyone who with any experience with fire myth storytime will not be confused at the idea that fire in the sense of a myth is treated as a substance given that in many mythemes it is something you can steal.

If for example, I asked someone "what substance did Prometheus steal from the heavens and give to mankind which resulted in his punishment" I don't think that they are going to say "well acktyually fire isn't a substance" because thanks to their goddamn partially to fully developed frontal lobes they can just make the connection and say fire dude
Andrew Wang
Illinois 2016
User avatar
Good Goblin Housekeeping
Auron
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:03 am

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by Good Goblin Housekeeping »

Oh No You Didn't wrote: Sat Mar 27, 2021 11:11 pm
CPiGuy wrote: Sat Mar 27, 2021 10:14 pm i look forward to your tossup on the planet venus that uses the indicator "this star"

but more seriously that's a reasonable point i just think indicators should be accurate to modern understandings of things because it is important that players know what is being asked for
If someone wanted to ask about something, such as, let's say, the luminiferous aether, or the hypothetical element of the "aether" I think it would be perfectly reasonable to call it a 'substance' even if the modern understanding of either of the two is 'they don't exist' and thus in spite of being hypothetical substances are not substances and similarly I think anyone who with any experience with fire myth storytime will not be confused at the idea that fire in the sense of a myth is treated as a substance given that in many mythemes it is something you can steal.

If for example, I asked someone "what substance did Prometheus steal from the heavens and give to mankind which resulted in his punishment" I don't think that they are going to say "well acktyually fire isn't a substance" because thanks to their goddamn partially to fully developed frontal lobes they can just make the connection and say fire dude
Hell why don't we also just refuse to like, call lightning bolts "objects" because real life lightning bolts are not objects even though in a Greek mythological sense they are treated as objects that are literally forged
Andrew Wang
Illinois 2016
User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

Hell why don't we also just refuse to like, call lightning bolts "objects" because real life lightning bolts are not objects even though in a Greek mythological sense they are treated as objects that are literally forged
as this correct analysis realizes, this is 100% an object and it's aimed right at Wang's kisser. Zeus style
Will Alston
Dartmouth College '16
Columbia Business School '21
User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4295
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by Auks Ran Ova »

Let's all make sure to stay relatively civil and on-topic, please.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??, BHSU forever
Member, ACF
Member emeritus, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT
User avatar
heterodyne
Rikku
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 9:47 am

Re: Fire is not a substance

Post by heterodyne »

I think that the scope of the word "substance" is relatively contentious and is used to make different distinctions in different places, but let's bracket that.

I think context matters. In the discourses that make up mythology and religion, fire is (often) treated and talked about as a substance. For instance, in the Prometheus myth, fire is treated as a substance that can be hidden, taken from place to place, and so on. It would be misleading, to my mind, to clue it in a way that suggested it was not a substance, just as it would be misleading to write your clues about Ratatosk so that they align with the current scientific consensus, which understands squirrels to be incapable of speech.
Alston [Montgomery] Boyd
Bloomington High School '15
UChicago '19
UChicago Divinity '21
they
Locked