Re: ::scr Re: doesn't have the morlocks

[Alaric Snell <alaric@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday 08 April 2002 16:38, you wrote:

> Sounds cool. However, I don't think I've experienced that sort of thing.
> Although I know I am very much like my (male) grandparents, but never
> really knew them due to death getting in the way, I still my nuture in a
> scientific (i.e. father / mother) family made me the way I am today.

Right. And the moral of this is that both nature and nurture matter. They are 
just... starting points for one's development.

> > Hmmm... how?
>
> That you wouldn't be good at being an artist, in the same way artists are.
> Artists are by defintion good at being artists, being good at art.
> So if you weren't good at being an artist, then you are no good at art?
> does that follow?

No, no, not what I meant - I meant that if I put effort in to overcome my 
'nature' with 'nurture' and became an artist, then to make best use of the 
'nature' I have, I'd be a different kind of artist to those who naturally 
ended up in art because it was in their *nature* to do so. My 'nature' is not 
particularly arty in the conventional sense; I would make an unconventional 
artist.

ABS

-- 
                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software