The Mythological Farm Utility Morality Theorem
Created | Updated Jan 28, 2002
Mythology (the area of knowledge having to do with things that scientists don't like) is a vast and complicated issue. Since man looked around himself and thought, or considered his first stick, or got too close to the fire, he has always needed to explain such things, as the ground, the trees, or the pain coming from his hand. It was all quite a simple step of logic, then, to think that there must be a handfull of some superpowerful beings up on a mountain who control the earth, make trees grow and drop sticks, and make his hand hurt. Woman, of course, was probably more sensible than this, and therefore you almost never hear of "ancient woman" instead of "ancient man."
So where, do you ask, do farm implements come in? Consider, for a moment, the mythological beings that man thought up which were evil*. Among the oddly large number are almost invariably Death (or the Grim Reaper, whatever you want to call him) and the devil. The devil is commonly pictured with a pitchfork, and Death, as we all know, wouldn't be caught dead without his scythe.
Now, ruleing out the possibility that both are part-time farmers (which even the most devoted illogist must admit is hugely impossible), there is absolutely no reason for them to have such tools about their persons. And yet they, the most evil* and non-agricultureily inclined entitys known to man, both have objects which would be better found on a farm. There are dozens of more probable implements for them to be found with. The devil would be much aided, for example, by a flamethrower, and Death would be far more in character holding a machine gun.
Furthermore, there are absolutely no good mythological beings that have such agricultural utilities. Does God ever use a rake? Is Mother Nature ever pictured with so much as a spade? No.
So we have to ask ourselves: Is there a reason for this? Is moral ineptitude connected to agricultural tools? Take, for example, a typical plough. Nothing mystical about it, nor are there any malignant properties about the item. And farmers handle such things almost every day, without any moral side-effects. But somehow, we theorize, such is not the case about these entities.
It is well known that the objects commonly assosiated with gods and mystical beings have properties far beyond their mundane counterparts. Thor's hammer, for example, is used by it's owner to throw lightning bolts, while the entire population crisis can be blamed on Cupid's arrows. This is known, to mythologicians, as the Theological Implement Advancement Effect. Yet interestingly, as far as the writer of this entry knows, no powers have been ascribed to ethier the scythe or the pitchfork. Why is there this exeption to the effect? Was this purposeful by their owners, or is it just how things worked out?
As I get to the end of this entry, I realise that I actualy don't have the slightest clue. And therefore, here is the summary of the theorem: A couple of bad guys snatched a few things lying around some other guy's farm, and we don't know why. It is, of course, a theory, and therefore could be as far from the truth as a thing thirty feet and two inches away from another thing. Observations by others would be accepted, as I'm too lazy to do it myself.
*: Recently, the REP (Rights for Evil People) organization has told us to put in a notice whenever we use the word "evil" that it is perfectly ok to be that way, and that they are merely "malignantly inclined." We, of course, told them to shut up.
So where, do you ask, do farm implements come in? Consider, for a moment, the mythological beings that man thought up which were evil*. Among the oddly large number are almost invariably Death (or the Grim Reaper, whatever you want to call him) and the devil. The devil is commonly pictured with a pitchfork, and Death, as we all know, wouldn't be caught dead without his scythe.
Now, ruleing out the possibility that both are part-time farmers (which even the most devoted illogist must admit is hugely impossible), there is absolutely no reason for them to have such tools about their persons. And yet they, the most evil* and non-agricultureily inclined entitys known to man, both have objects which would be better found on a farm. There are dozens of more probable implements for them to be found with. The devil would be much aided, for example, by a flamethrower, and Death would be far more in character holding a machine gun.
Furthermore, there are absolutely no good mythological beings that have such agricultural utilities. Does God ever use a rake? Is Mother Nature ever pictured with so much as a spade? No.
So we have to ask ourselves: Is there a reason for this? Is moral ineptitude connected to agricultural tools? Take, for example, a typical plough. Nothing mystical about it, nor are there any malignant properties about the item. And farmers handle such things almost every day, without any moral side-effects. But somehow, we theorize, such is not the case about these entities.
It is well known that the objects commonly assosiated with gods and mystical beings have properties far beyond their mundane counterparts. Thor's hammer, for example, is used by it's owner to throw lightning bolts, while the entire population crisis can be blamed on Cupid's arrows. This is known, to mythologicians, as the Theological Implement Advancement Effect. Yet interestingly, as far as the writer of this entry knows, no powers have been ascribed to ethier the scythe or the pitchfork. Why is there this exeption to the effect? Was this purposeful by their owners, or is it just how things worked out?
As I get to the end of this entry, I realise that I actualy don't have the slightest clue. And therefore, here is the summary of the theorem: A couple of bad guys snatched a few things lying around some other guy's farm, and we don't know why. It is, of course, a theory, and therefore could be as far from the truth as a thing thirty feet and two inches away from another thing. Observations by others would be accepted, as I'm too lazy to do it myself.
*: Recently, the REP (Rights for Evil People) organization has told us to put in a notice whenever we use the word "evil" that it is perfectly ok to be that way, and that they are merely "malignantly inclined." We, of course, told them to shut up.
