Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8369954" data-attributes="member: 71699">That seems contradictory. It opens by assuming temperament should come out of evolved role - predator - and then ignores features that should tie to role evolved - flying, laser eyes (were such things possible). If being a predator would make my temperament X. Having laser eyes should make it Y. These are exactly as fundamental and interesting as differences.Note I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you in saying that. What I think we are doing is trying to properly frame the problem, so that we know how to form and judge solutions. As I said, so far I have - not commensurable, not scalable, and if borderline cultural then called out as a feature of some, not all.To my mind, assuming flying cat people all have temperament X due to their evolved role Y is risky. It goes right into stereotyping through oversimplification. So perhaps a desire for 'actually interesting differences' that are limited to temperament based on pseudo-scientific ideas about how erstwhile predators should behave post-sentience, is going to be problematic. It will provide narrative soil for the problems we have been talking about.</blockquote>