I wrote yesterday’s blog in my “common place” book sitting at a Starbucks in Gig Harbor, Washington. I felt angry, sad, helpless, courageous, righteous, alone. By the time I drove home (about an hour) I was no longer certain that I wanted to make my thoughts public. I called Cris and read her the blog.
“What do you think?” I asked anxiously. “Too intense?”
She laughed in a kind way, sort of husky and warm. “The blog is perfect, EJ. But I think you should read it to your mom and Solin before you post it.”
Oh. Right. That never occurred to me. I never considered that maybe I should have changed or omitted *their* names as well (and after speaking with them, I didn’t. As a matter of fact, all my mother said was, “Do you really think I’m still wiry?” And Solin just chuckled and told me hilarious stories about my father as a boy.).
So, I typed up the blog and, before I went to post it, I decided to go lurk my own forum (why not?). I got so engaged that before I knew it I was posting away on the boards. It wasn’t until this morning that I realized that one of the issues that had come up on the boards was racism. Do Celestials and Terrapyres hate each other, like, genetically, or are they simply taught to hate each other? I rattled off what I thought was a good answer.
But, you know what, racism (hate, ignorance, etc.) isn’t a simple issue and it doesn’t have simple answers. Just as Celestials = Evil, or Terrapyres = Good, isn’t correct. I spent all day at the downtown Seattle library really looking for answers that were beyond the surface (the skin) of the issue.
Strangely, the book that struck me more than any other was “Game Theory,” by Morton D. Davis (which is a book Jennifer actually lent me a few weeks ago) published by Dover. In the book, Davis writes of a 1978 article by John Maynard Smith. Davis (paraphrasing Smith) winds up describing the Celestial and Terrapyre condition perfectly in a “very unusual” application of game theory in which creatures choose sophisticated strategies that enable them to survive as a species.
Davis writes: “The fitness of a species, also, is its ability to survive.” Altruistic tendencies can be an inherited trait. It is as though the “invisible hand” that often effects economics can also be applied to some unknown/unseen creator who “weaves individual behavior into behavior patterns for the entire species.” Explained specifically to MG3K:
The desire to fight is a desire Celestials pass on genetically because it is a trait that benefits the survival of the species. And don’t jump to the conclusion that a “warrior” trait would lead, ultimately, to the demise of the warriors all together. The ratio of offspring to individuals lost to their own patriotism would still favor the survival of the warrior class. The same is true for Terrapyres: The desire to protect the Grail for Christ would be an altruistic trait.
These survival ratio models are quoted by Davis as described by William D. Hamilton (1964).
Simply put, it would be very, very, very rare for a Terrapyre or a Celestial *not* to want to fight the “opposing side.” Their very genes demand the survival of their species.
To really delve into this—and it is fascinating—go further and read about Smith’s dove and hawk theory. It truly is unexpected and amazing. When we’re down to the wire, when the chips are really down, when the Grail itself and survival at large is at stake, the hawks will prevail.
Not very (human) Christian, I know, with no meek inheriting the Earth, but in terms of animal survival—and Immortals, to me, fall into the animal (primal) category more so than humans—these are the models we’re dealing with.
E.J.
