Would you look at me like I was crazy if I said "sea monsters exist", though?
No. I lost my best friend when his ship was attacked by a hydra. I watched in horror from about 20 clicks away as it swallowed his ship whole. Sometimes I think I can still hear him and his crew scream from within the belly of the wicked beast. As if it hasn't fully digested them yet...cruel fate.
Monster typically means, large imaginary creature. Giant squids aren't imaginary so aren't really monsters.
You could call them monstrously big or something though.
Hitler could be/is counted as a monster. Just depends on your definition and the context.
Monster has nothing to do with being imaginary. We describe things as "monsters" all the time. And how many "monster movies" are there ABOUT giant squids? Plenty. This is what I mean by making the subconscious distinction between "Scientific" and "superstitious". Once a subject becomes evident, tangible or proven, it crosses into the scientific and people want to cut all ties with the superstitious aspects of it, even if it's exactly the same thing with a different name.
Monster is associated with things that don't exist, such as Frankenstein and Bigfoot. when you describe something as a monster you are saying it has similar qualities to a big bad imaginary creature.
People cut the superstitious part because superstition implies witches and magic, not real things.
Let's just split this into two different kinds/categories of monsters and leave it be.
Btw, I love Casper. He's a bit of a creeper, but awesome nonetheless.
You are proving my point. Giant squids didn't exist to the greater scientific world until early 2000. Until then, they were classified as "monsters", both in movies and in myth. Now that they do exist to the greater scientific world, you want to call them something else? They're the exact same creatures depicted in myth and movies (maybe a little less colorful), but just because it's crossed into science, you don't want to acknowledge its association with the superstitious.Originally Posted by Superdooperphailmachine
In other words, the giant squid was a monster that was proven to exist. But nobody wants to admit that it was once a myth. Likewise, if ghosts are found to exist in one form or another, nobody will want to admit that it was once a myth either.
Oh, and once aliens are discovered, we're gonna pretend like it was never a myth either.
Aliens visiting earth is a myth, when/if we eventually travel to other solar systems galaxies ect we will still say that aliens never visited the earth before whatever year. We might even stop calling them aliens who knows.
I don't know what you are getting at with the not acknowledging thing. We discovered a creature, we named and categorised it like we do with all other creatures, because it exists it stops being a monster because unlike a monster it is a confirmed real thing.
In the unlikely event ghosts are confirmed to exist I will acknowledge that we didn't believe in them and all you believers will get to gloat.
That's exactly it, though. The "MONSTER" is a confirmed, real thing. To call it a giant squid and refuse to call it a monster is to pretend like it was never a myth. Basically, anyone in the 1800's who told tall tales of 40-foot long tentacled sea beasts was right. There are such things as sea monsters, we just gave it a different name. Basically superstition and science are not a strict dichotomy. Things pass in between them quite frequently. The line between reality and imagination is extremely thin so for the scientifically inclined to look down on superstition and the superstitious is kinda BS.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks