SH Archive Book | - 1752, Man More Than a Machine

[KD Archive]

I keep on looking for a word of the past which would correspond to our word "clone", or may be to a combo meaning a "genetically engineered being". I do believe that we fail to locate certain things due to those certain things having their names substituted. In other words, we do not know what to look for.

Anyways, I wanted to offer a little book for your interpretation here. Do you think the author is talking about human beings only, animals or some other entities are mixed in as well?

• More specifically, who does the author refer to as "Brute"?
  • ... a savage human, an animal, or an artificially created human?
• Source

Additional texts on Brutes:

• 1700 - 1704
• 1705 - 1724
• 1725 - 1729
• 1730 - 1769

Note: This OP was recovered from the Sh.org archive.

Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.

 

[AthroposRex]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: AnthroposRex
Date: 2019-11-07 03:16:51
Reaction Score: 1

With the reference to "mosiack" law and revelations, I lean towards giants or some kind of chimera that was common. Giants seem like regular people, just larger, in all the photo evidence on this site. The author mentions "mere animals" as he compares to brutes, which gives us more than animal, less than man. Trippy. Good find.

 

[codis]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: codis
Date: 2019-11-07 08:21:57
Reaction Score: 1

I suspect a nationalistic background, probably with religious overtones - to create a common public enemy like today.
Like all European conquerors viewed non-christian indigenous people of other continents as "brutes" and "savages".
Only not the Chinese and Japanese empires, which were able to resist forcefully and for a long period.

Mind you, even technologically backward muslim countries view the western infidels as savages.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Recognition
Date: 2019-11-08 11:23:49
Reaction Score: 2

@KorbenDallas you're going to love this:
Brute Beasts (Forerunner Commentary)
I Corinthians 15:32—34:

"If in the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantage is it to me? If the dead do not rise, Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. Do not be deceived: Evil company corrupts good habits. Awake to righteousness, and do not sin; for some do not have the knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame."

R: You called it! There's the Artemis Machine at Ephesus! I also looked up etymology of Brute and found

brute (adj.)
early 15c., "of or belonging to animals, non-human," from Old French brut "coarse, brutal, raw, crude," from Latin brutus "heavy, dull, stupid, insensible, unreasonable"

R: I think "unreasonable" should be looked at as "without reason", as in they didn't feel there was a reason for these beings existence. This next verse says a lot:

2 Peter 2:12 King James Version (KJV)
12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption.

Interesting!

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Bear Claw
Date: 2019-11-08 16:33:26
Reaction Score: 1

I know Taur means bull. But MinoTAUR. CheaTAUR, cenTAUR, Even possible demenTOR from Harry Potter - lacks a soul. At a push you could extend to dinoSAUR. ManticAUR (MANTICORE).

Bull's of course are a stud animal designed to have their seed sowed to inseminate lady bulls. Some kind of parallel there surely.

I am actually not convinced by this myself - seems a bit obscure. But I think its worth putting out there.

Brute reminds me of Brutus of Caeser fame. Probably an inserted character, although nothing obvious springs to mind, unless it was some kind of metaphorical allegory.