Ironically, Octavious (whose name is a villain from Spider-man!), I've been trying to wade through the first trilogy from Brian Herbert (House Atreides, House Harkonnen, House Corrino). The basic story is actually excellent, but Brian's writing (or maybe it's Kevin J. Anderson's) sucks. It's boring and way to drawn out. I've read other works by Anderson, and they were OK, but mostly pulp Star Wars crap, so it could be his writing that sucks.

I, too, love Frank Herbert's universe, but I never could finish Chapterhouse as it just got a bit too far into the future and just plain weird to me. I love Dune through God Emperor though, and find them to be simply some of the most original and best Science Fiction has to offer. Not necessarily #1, but well up into the top ten series of all time.

@Draug

I felt the exact same way about the new Dune books. It was cool to get more of the Dune Universe, but it was so clearly not written by Frank.

@mapleleaf :it doesn't matter if it is a legit word, i defined a word for the purpose of having a discussion. Does that somehow invalidate the discussion?

Ignore maple, orathaic. He is just a Canadian wanna-be-troll from Canada (I had to say it twice or he wouldn't get the insult. :-) )

Draug wrote, "Many of us did, but it to google something only recently became a legit word/phrase (google as a verb is now in one the Oxford dictionary, IIRC), yet google has been used as a verb for years."
================================================================
Draug, is that supposed to be English? Are you off of your meds again?

@orath - Acknowledge your illiteracy. There would be more dignity in it.

IGNOSTIC someone who ignores spelling mistakes unless they matter.

Spelling always matters.

@mapleleaf; I disagree. Having spent 20+ years working with non native speakers I find it petty and demotivating to always correct spelling or grammar. Unless they ask, or are at risk of being unclear I don't. With native speakers I am less tolerant. In any case as English is an ever changing language trying to preserve it in aspic is to deny it's heritage.

Did I just hear a troll grunt? Nope. Guess not.

In threat of a topic highjack, I disagree with you diplomat61. Obviously I don't have the same experience but I think it's always healthy to help people out with their spelling. For instance, a long time on this site I used 'ofcourse' instead of the correct 'of course', but nobody corrected me. As I am not a native English speaker, how am I supposed to learn? Thereby I think incorrect spelling adds to a negative image of a person. So while you think to 'spare' your clients or whatever, they still humble and stumble in life, not knowing what they're doing wrong. Bad spelling always leads to negative connotations. When I encounter a player with bad spelling or grammar that influences my image of their diplomacy skills.

Or, when using internet language.

"We can haz all1ance??"

@Ursa: I take your point. In my defence, I do correct the people I work with (clients I don't worry about unless they are really going to embarrass themselves) but not all the time. I do not want to be pedantic or picky with messages between us. Something with wider circulation I do help with.

I want to add that in a forum like this it is hard to judge when to comment on someone's language skills unless you are certain where they come from (I still cringe at the memory of correcting your Dutch).

I'm with draugnar, please don't feed the troll.

i'm not illiterate, i just can't remember the word for new word made of two old words... it always escapes my mind. portmanteau, portmanteau, portmanteau, portmanteau!!!

i think this page has lost most of what the thread was talking about...

so let me think out loud for a moment.

As far as mental tools go, it could be possible to find one which made life easier. A concept of 'God' may fit into that category... hmm.

There are a lot of -theist and -gnostic words: apatheism (I don't care), ignosticism (sometimes called igtheism), maltheism (God is evil), antitheism (I'm against God and religion), and others.

@orathaic:
I don't know about that. How about the Christians through-out history who were Christian (or other religions, but I know most about this particular one), then were persecuted, but still did not give up the idea?
The mental tool theory would explain people turning to God after the persecution started and because the persecution started, but what about their insistence to hold on to the mental tool when it CAUSED the persecution and when letting go of the mental tool would end the persecution, which would make life easier?

@orthaic: "@JamieK: you said 'There is no God - by any definition.' - by the previous definitions as a mythical construct, i tries to prove that this idea, by definition, doesn't exist.

"However i am forced to conclude that, like calculus, this 'God' does exist. It is a mental construct, one which is used for various mental tasks. Calculus can be used to work out newtonian gravity, you can explain to others how to use Calculus, you can demonstrate it on paper. Follow the logical steps through.

"The same can be said of 'God' only replacing 'newtonian gravity' by some moral question.

"Now i assume you don't for a second deny the existance of mental constructs."

Obviously I accept that the CONCEPT of god exists. However that does not mean that "god" exists in any meaningful way.

Imagine I draw a picture of some little creatures with purple skin and yellow spots all over its body. I call these creature "spottymonsters". I show you the picture and tell you "this is what a spottymonster looks like". The CONCEPT of a "spottymonster" now exists in your mind. Every time I mention "spottymonsters" to you, you'll be able to visualise the picture I showed you. This does NOT mean that spottymonsters now exist, just because the concept does. You cannot bring things into existence simply by concieving of them.

In other words, your comments above are correct, but pointless.

@Jamiet, ok, i disagree with you in a fairly signifigant sense.

'spottymonsters' now exist, they are a mental construct which i know about from your post. The concept isn't important, perhaps not even useful, but the idea exists. The existance of the idea of 'God' is way more important than the idea by defining 'God' as a mental construct (and nothing more) then it is something you accept exists - which contradicts your previous statement that 'There is no God - by any definition.'