Lorenz

[Dave]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz-Lorenz

Is Lorenz just a common last name, or does this have anything to do with Keel?

[Reichu]

Keel is named after Konrad Lorenz. There's something about it in one of the commentary appendices.

[The Eva Monkey]

And according to Anno's website, Keel is in reference to the keel of a boat.

[Carl Horn]

And according to Anno's website, Keel is in reference to the keel of a boat.

That's true, although in German the same word is spelled "Kiel," and so I rendered it that way in the manga (does ADV spell it that way?). Kiel is also the name of an important port city on Germany's North Sea coast.

That's based, of course, on the presumption it should carry the German spelling by default, but seeing as though the man in question is the force behind groups with names like SEELE, GEHIRN, and NERV, it didn't seem that far out on a limb

[Reichu]

That's true, although in German the same word is spelled "Kiel," and so I rendered it that way in the manga (does ADV spell it that way?).

Last I checked. "Keel" is, like it or not, the officially-sanctioned spelling, so it is probably more proper to use it... You've been spelling it against Anno's vision! Tsk tsk, Horn-san!

A similar situation occurs with Matarael... "Matriel" is the way one commonly sees this angel's name rendered (in non-NGE literature), and this is even the spelling the katakana alludes to... yet they render it "Matarael" in the Roman alphabet. Oh, well.

[Carl Horn]

That's true, although in German the same word is spelled "Kiel," and so I rendered it that way in the manga (does ADV spell it that way?).

Last I checked. "Keel" is, like it or not, the officially-sanctioned spelling, so it is probably more proper to use it... You've been spelling it against Anno's vision! Tsk tsk, Horn-san!

A similar situation occurs with Matarael... "Matriel" is the way one commonly sees this angel's name rendered (in non-NGE literature), and this is even the spelling the katakana alludes to... yet they render it "Matarael" in the Roman alphabet. Oh, well.

It's true that Tiffany Grant's German was also better than Yuko Miyamura's I guess between "Kiel/Keel." "Matarael/Matriel," and EVA's "native" language, we have words originally written in Roman, Hebrew, and Japanese systems.

This kind of thing is seen in the news every day--for example, French- and Spanish-speaking people spell the country we call "Iraq," "Irak." The original, of course, is in Arabic. I kind of like "Irak"--sounds more sinister.

[Dave]

Yes, this sad state of the world leaves us perfectionists with only one option: learn every widespread language. Sadly, it's a lot more difficult than it sounds.

[konnor]

i thought it was a reference to the wandering jew?

[DatDude]

No thats a bad internet rumor that is harder to kill then elvis

[Carl Horn]

i thought it was a reference to the wandering jew?

I could be wrong, but I believe that is a fan rumor. I'm not aware of anything in the series or movies that links Kiel with the legend of the Wandering Jew.

The Wandering Jew is sometimes considered to be a religious anti-Semitic story (I say "religious" because much modern anti-Semitism is based more on ancestry than what religion you profess), but to be fair, even very religious people who are of good will often have to paper over the cracks in order to avoid a serious argument. I'm reminded of the Gore-Lieberman ticket for President in 2000; Gore said he was a born-again Christian, whereas Lieberman said he was an Orthodox Jew. I was thinking...dude, maybe one of you is right, or maybe neither of you is right, but it seems to me you can't BOTH be right at the same time!

[JinKazama]

Lorenz Keel = The wandering jew = The commander of SEELE = A man = An old man = A male human = The old man in EVA who has an eyeshade (what you saw/memory of the image) = The voice of the old man in EVA who has an eyeshade(what you heard/memory of the sound) = The evil guy(what you have associated him with in your mind) = Anything (Anything that pops up in your mind that you'll associate him with, whether its done unconciously, subconciously or intentionally) =Lorenz Keel = a physically existing object = an illusion you created in your mind = yourself???

8) 8) 8) 8) reminds you of something?

[JinKazama]

i thought it was a reference to the wandering jew?

I could be wrong, but I believe that is a fan rumor. I'm not aware of anything in the series or movies that links Kiel with the legend of the Wandering Jew.

The Wandering Jew is sometimes considered to be a religious anti-Semitic story (I say "religious" because much modern anti-Semitism is based more on ancestry than what religion you profess), but to be fair, even very religious people who are of good will often have to paper over the cracks in order to avoid a serious argument. I'm reminded of the Gore-Lieberman ticket for President in 2000; Gore said he was a born-again Christian, whereas Lieberman said he was an Orthodox Jew. I was thinking...dude, maybe one of you is right, or maybe neither of you is right, but it seems to me you can't BOTH be right at the same time!

actually I think they can be both right at the same time if you wish not to distinguish them on whats "right" and "wrong". for example, they both are human which is something they both can coexist on - they both can be human 8)

[AchtungAffen]

i thought it was a reference to the wandering jew?

I could be wrong, but I believe that is a fan rumor. I'm not aware of anything in the series or movies that links Kiel with the legend of the Wandering Jew.

The Wandering Jew is sometimes considered to be a religious anti-Semitic story (I say "religious" because much modern anti-Semitism is based more on ancestry than what religion you profess), but to be fair, even very religious people who are of good will often have to paper over the cracks in order to avoid a serious argument. I'm reminded of the Gore-Lieberman ticket for President in 2000; Gore said he was a born-again Christian, whereas Lieberman said he was an Orthodox Jew. I was thinking...dude, maybe one of you is right, or maybe neither of you is right, but it seems to me you can't BOTH be right at the same time!

actually I think they can be both right at the same time if you wish not to distinguish them on whats "right" and "wrong". for example, they both are human which is something they both can coexist on - they both can be human 8)

Unless God is dead, the society revolves around the values of good and bad, as in correct and incorrect. IF God is dead, and the new values are what's pleasant and what's not, then I could say Judaism is better (more pleasant) than Catholicism, because Rabbis can marry. Not the search of an escaping absolute truth, but the contingent stuff of reality.

I'd love to know there's an absolute truth. It would give me strong fundaments for everything. But knowing how odd the movements of space and time are, I wouldn't be surprised that there's only particular truths. Or maybe there's an absolute truth which we can only approach by little. That's the religious question, according to Giussani, the question about truth.

[Shwiggie]

Reminds me of a Mad Magazine cartoon once, which described the differences between an Orthodox Jew and a "Reformed" Jew as being belief in Christ

"The Wandering Jew" was just another instance of how certain people attempted to project guilt over a single event upon an entire race. More fiction to feed the masses and accomplish a partisan goal.

[Hexon.Arq]

There are no absolute truths to which we can relate; only a series of identifiers for the known, which constitute the universe in which we live -- the identifiers, that is. In truth, reality is nothing but a configuration of believeable lies; lies because they, the truths, are only parading as what they are, and are not what they are portending to be. A star is not a star -- it is merely what we know to be a star. This can neither be proven nor disproved, so stating that a star is a star, beyond uncertainty, becomes a lie by virtue of the uncertainty which envelops all that we have come to know through our senses. The inherent statement made through any statement is "I know this," and granting error, "I believe this." You know or believe what you sense and comprehend. In relating our universe inwardly or outwardly, we are required to employ some degree of certainty in all that we do. Most certain is that things are as they are, no matter what we know about them. This certainty is required to deny the possibility of the human experience distorting some "Absolute" reality to be of any use, so that we may relate to anything. The inherent statement, that of certainty, negates itself through its use as a slave for avatars, and all of its properties are rendered "Absolute" lies, even the truths. Up is not up -- it is the opposite of down, which is itself not. This may be right or wrong, but to call it either would, by virtue of uncertainty, be a lie.

I spell it Kiel.

[Dave]

Pardon my rudeness, but that's a load of crap, Hexon. Nothing more than a poor, small, frightened animal trying to comfort themselves in the dark. Please do not mistake this as a personal insult, for humanity is the animal I am referring to.

[Hexon.Arq]

Prove it wrong, liar. :P

[JinKazama]

I'd love to know there's an absolute truth. It would give me strong fundaments for everything. But knowing how odd the movements of space and time are, I wouldn't be surprised that there's only particular truths. Or maybe there's an absolute truth which we can only approach by little. That's the religious question, according to Giussani, the question about truth.

The Absolute Truth, on the presumption that it does exist and there's only one absolute truth, then we may look at everything as part of the absolute truth. The absolute truth will include everything, it must, otherwise its at most only the one truth in one's mind.

how did we move off on the topic by this far????

[JinKazama]

There are no absolute truths to which we can relate; only a series of identifiers for the known, which constitute the universe in which we live -- the identifiers, that is. In truth, reality is nothing but a configuration of believeable lies; lies because they, the truths, are only parading as what they are, and are not what they are portending to be. A star is not a star -- it is merely what we know to be a star. This can neither be proven nor disproved, so stating that a star is a star, beyond uncertainty, becomes a lie by virtue of the uncertainty which envelops all that we have come to know through our senses. The inherent statement made through any statement is "I know this," and granting error, "I believe this." You know or believe what you sense and comprehend. In relating our universe inwardly or outwardly, we are required to employ some degree of certainty in all that we do. Most certain is that things are as they are, no matter what we know about them. This certainty is required to deny the possibility of the human experience distorting some "Absolute" reality to be of any use, so that we may relate to anything. The inherent statement, that of certainty, negates itself through its use as a slave for avatars, and all of its properties are rendered "Absolute" lies, even the truths. Up is not up -- it is the opposite of down, which is itself not. This may be right or wrong, but to call it either would, by virtue of uncertainty, be a lie.

I spell it Kiel.

great reasoning stuff, Hexon. Idealism rules! 8)

[AchtungAffen]

Putting nominalism aside, the negation of essences, the mere belief of a monotheism has included the notion of an absolute truth: God itself. As Ratzinger told in his inaugural speech, today's problem is relativism. If everything is relative, and there's not an absolute truth that marks what's good and wrong, then its the same being in a nazi regime than in an anarchical one. That's true, and that's what Nietzsche wanted to solve by changing the guidance values of society from good-bad, to pleasant-unpleasant. I don't think it's very pleasant to live in a nazi regime.

The destruction of the notion of absolute truth has many other consequences, like the end of natural law, and of course, the principle of equanimity (sp?)(moving away from the letter of the law to do what the spirit of the law says). So, it would be more comfortable, more pleasant to have absolute truth. But well, reality tends to be not so easy.

The issue is then to have the "religious feeling", not about God, but about having that most inner question about the existance of truth and the active search for it. I'll search, and when I do the resume of my life I'll decide wether it exists or not. In the meantime I'll be flip-flopping according to the situation.