2 ms·
But it's not a useful lens. It's overly simplistic and holds no predictive power. It can only be applied in hindsight. Even as a narrative scaffold, it fails be
by bena 6y ago
But it's not a useful lens. It's overly simplistic and holds no predictive power. It can only be applied in hindsight. Even as a narrative scaffold, it fails because it creates one-dimensional characters unless you're pulling from so many colors that you're not really using it anyway.
And the metaphor isn't the point. So trying to defend the flat Earth model is missing the point of the metaphor entirely. It's an "ahksually" retort.
- chrisdirkis 6y agoThat's more the meat and potatoes I was interested in reading, so I appreciate the response. I think there are probably better lenses that are equally simple (maybe Big 5/MBTI, though I know little about them), but the advantage of the colour pie is that MTG players already spend time engaging with it and have a broad understanding of the tropes/stereotypes/etc. There's an example of applying it in the article, but I'm guessing you think that that's an outlier situation, and that it wouldn't broadly be useful. I can respect that, and I'm not sure I disagree yet. Call me back in a year or two. Hadn't thought of using it as a narrative scaffold, and can definitely see why you wouldn't want it as your sole source for such. Having 5 possible character themes and 10-15 possible relationships does not an interesting story make. I thought that demonstrating the use of the flat Earth model as a lens would be interesting, so apologies if it came across as a retort.