Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rtp47.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!pesnta!greipa!decwrl!decvax!bellcore!petrus!magic!nvc!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw
From: throopw@rtp47.UUCP (Wayne Throop)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Human Sacrifice II
Message-ID: <244@rtp47.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 5-Nov-85 18:14:29 EST
Article-I.D.: rtp47.244
Posted: Tue Nov  5 18:14:29 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 10-Nov-85 15:39:55 EST
References: <451@imsvax.UUCP>
Organization: Data General, RTP, NC
Lines: 38

I have two questions about the proposition that human sacrifice in
ancient times implies "cosmic catastrophe".

1)  Why is "human sacrifice" (in several forms, but primarily
    infanticide as a simple form of retroactive birth control) still
    common today?

2)  Why was human sacrifice the response to cosmic catastrophe?


The first question is the obvious outcome of the observation that Ted's
"universal law" of parental love is broken daily, in many animal
species, and in the among humans as well.  Was this "universal law"
more universal in the past than we observe it now, and if so, why?

The second question is the obvious outcome of the assumption that these
human sacrifices would have had *no* *effect* *whatever* on the cosmic
events they were purported to influence.  What maintained the
co-religionist's sacrificial fervor when the sacrifices proved
fruitless?  Similarly, what process selected for these practices in the
first place?

Note that I'm *not* claiming that humans don't do things that are
fairly thoroughly demonstrated to have no benefit... most papers have
horiscopes after all.  I'm just wondering what is the connection between
cosmic catastrophe and human sacrifice such that the former leads to the
latter, rather than, say, fervent prayer (which, come to think of it,
might even be more effective than sacrifice).

It seems to me, in light of these problems, that the proposition just
doesn't make much sense.

--
MICHAELMAS: "You don't think my theory holds water?"
DOMINO:     "A bathtub will hold water.  A canteen is usually sufficent."
                          --- from "MICHAELMAS" by Algis Budrys
-- 
Wayne Throop at Data General, RTP, NC
!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw