To all those who read the recent post by Apollodorus Tatharin, I offer
this message.

I am a man of little significance, and my talents are not many. Indeed,
most of you may only know me by many of my reckless deaths I often
entertain the world with, or by my volatile temper. I admit, I am not an
authority on anything, so take my words with a grain of salt. If they
offer but a different perspective, I shall consider my task
accomplished.

Occultists are a colourful lot. Some of them possess overwhelming might,
some of them wield ingenious intellect, but as with rest of the world,
even they have their own share of bombastic fools and histrionic
halfwits. Apollodorus Tatharin belongs to neither extreme. Apollodorus
Tatharin is mediocre, just like me.

Let us begin, then, by casting a quick glance at his post. It is well
structured, having three distinct parts: introduction, body and
conclusion.

In the introduction, Apollodorus Tatharin notices that Silas' previous
post, one to which he is responding to, lacks despair. Fair observation,
but from this he proceeds to draw rather questionable conclusions:
because Silas does not show sorrow in his post, he must be happy for
Shallam to have been destroyed. This, of course, "suggests" that Shallam
was not "an especially pleasant place to live" under the rule of Light
and Good. Since this is the foundation of a new beginning, it "deserves
consideration".

No, it doesn't. Lack of visible emotion in Silas' post does not prove
this conclusion.


The body of the text attempts to be clear and concise, divided into
three "relevant points". The first point argues that "there is
absolutely no reason to believe that 'Light' is some sort of benevolent
force" because:

- first, the event in which Lady Aurora was born caused widespread
destruction. This is incorrect because correlation does not imply
causation. Lady Aurora was indeed born from an event which caused
destruction, but She Herself did not cause it. For example, every mother
can tell that childbirth can be painful. This does not mean that the
child born is an evil sadist. Furthermore, the statement that the
followers of Light have since then been emulating the destruction caused
by the coming of the Morning Star is simply ridiculous.

- second, Light "in cosmic terms" came relatively late and is therefore
irrelevant. Then what can be said about Elentari, Apollodorus Tatharin?

The second 'relevant point' is another pitiful attempt to draw
significant conclusions - this time not from insufficient premises, but
from sheer ignorance. Apparently, "we" (royal we?) know nothing about
Dunamis. We also think He is a "mysterious imposter". We should read
more texts about history, as they are readily available to all who wish
to learn. To quote Apollodorus Tatharin, "Most educated people know
these things already, of course, but it is sometimes worth revisiting
the lessons of history." At least with this I can wholeheartedly agree.

Third point is such propaganda only the mindless and deranged can spread
amongst themselves, accepting it without question. All that is written
in that paragraph are shameless lies and mudslinging. No proof, not a
single fact, only appeal to emotion and ethos.

The conclusion is drawn from all the above: Light must be destroyed
because it is "a festering cancer upon our world". What to say?

There are three basic ways by which one can persuade a listener to agree
with an argument: by appeal to emotion, by appeal to belief or
character, and by appeal to logic. Apollodorus Tatharin, of course,
styles himself a serious scholar and attempts to appeal to logic. In
this, he utterly fails in quite a comical manner, as demonstrated above.

Before you spout another page of nonsense, Apollodorus Tatharin, read
works of those who are better than you. Mathonwy, for example, is an
excellent rhetorician who wields language with good persuasion and
factual accuracy. Learn from him before you embarrass yourself again.

In truth,
Thaumas, a monk

Penned by my hand on the 9th of Glacian, in the year 613 AF.