Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 2109284" data-attributes="member: 7240">I'm sorry. Perhaps I should have phrased my statement differently: I study religious history professionally. I have read a number of scholarly works discussing monastic and ascetic orders. A number of them asserted that these orders, wherever they were found under-represented people of low social rank and over-represented people of high social rank. I was therefore curious as to where you encountered the view that East Asian ascetic orders did the opposite.That's one possibility. It really depends on how the monastic orders are about sharing their secrets. But I don't really understand why you're even raising this. There could be any number of reasons there are monks in a particular setting. No justification is required as long as the monks are consistent with the setting and fit in. No. It's not. It's just explaining one of the ways that monks are incongruent with a European setting. People seem to think that because I am saying monks don't fit in every setting that I'm really saying they don't fit in any setting. Where do I state that D&D=Europe? I tell you over and over and over again that this is not my position. And you repeatedly accuse me of taking this position anyway. Obviously you are not looking at what my problem with the monk as it stands is and what solution I propose. So I'll just clip and quote what I've already said here:</blockquote>