[UA] Risking it - Sunbjectivity or objectivity?

[Nick Wedig]

>1 - 'Luck' aside, chance is not an inherently subjective thing. Probability
>is a concrete, measurable (through statistics), manipulatible,
>understandable thing. Sure, in any given event, we can't encapsulate _all_
>the variables - the coin couls land on its edge, or Brownian motion could
>shake it to pieces mid-flip - but such occurances fall well below even the
>most miniscule margin for error. Chance is objective.
>
>2 - I think it's debatable whether entropomancy is based on _chance_ or
>_risk_ - that is, 'taking a chance'. You might not always be able to measure
>probabilities or control chances - but if the magick is based on consciously
>taking risks and deliberately putting yourself in a chaotic (and dangerous)
>situation, that's not a 'subjective' thing. That's a deliberate action that
>the adept infuses with meaning in the hope of gaining power.

What about human variables?  In the case of the sealed gun, the risk involved is based on wheter or not someone loaded it or not.  This too can be seen as a concrete, statistically measurable matter (e.g, he loads two guns out of twelve, or whatever).  Obviously, some actions on the parts of people count as chance variables for entropomancy, as one of the examples of charge gaining involves leaping into unnecessary battles, etc.

The point in claiming chance is subjective is not to say that it is not measurable (as your first point seems to take it) but rather that chance only exists when the results are unknown.  If the entropomancer spins the chamber, then looks in and sees the bullet's not in firing position (or is in position) and then fires, he's not taking a chance; he knows whether a bullet will be fired or not.  'Chance' is how we speak of events whose results are undetermined.  

If I roll a die and don't look at it, I can speak as accurately of the chances (of it being six or whatever number) before and after rolling.  Once I've seen the results, however, I can only speak fo chances in the past tense.  Similarly, even if the results were determined by clear forces, as long as the forces and results were unknown to me, I could speak of the chances in a given situation.  If I meet a man in the street and know that (for example) 10% of men were named John, I could address the unknown man as John and have a 10% chance of being right.

As for risk, the risk involved in a sealed gun problem seems identical to Russian roullette to me.  Either a bullet is or is not in the chamber of the gun.  How the bullet got there doesn't seem to matter as long as there is a possibility that it is there and a possibility that it is not there (and probably a proportion between the chances of these possibilities) and that the bodybag doesn't know which possibility is correct.  The risk the entropomancer runs is that someone might have loaded the gun.  Whether it is loaded or not does not affect the charge gathering, so much as the possibility and the recognition of this possibility.

Mr. Teapot
fears he's not explaining himself very well

____________________________________________________
FREE Disinformation E-book - http://www.disinfo.com

_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua