NIETZSCHE; DEAD PHILOSOPHERS' INBOX

[explosivecombat]

[TEXT; LOCKED TO doitrockapella]

The offer for conversation is always open, should you desire to take me up on it; I can't guarantee that I'll respond immediately, nor will it necessarily be the response you want, but I'll always respond in some way.

In the name of enlightened discourse.

Comments

[explosivecombat]

You're going to have to be more specific for me.

[doitrockapella]

I'll give you a riddle instead.

A fishing boat pulls a half-drowned man out of the sea. As they're drying him off and bringing him aid on the deck, the bedraggled man grasps the first mate by the lapels and gasps out a question — the first and only time he'd spoken since his rescue: "Is there seaweed in the water?"

When the first mate answers in the negative, the man shoves him away and hurls himself overboard, this time to his own death. Why?

[explosivecombat]

Can I assume I'm allowed to ask you questions of at least the "yes or no" variety if I can't work this out on my own?

[doitrockapella]

You certainly may. This one's more designed for that sort of interrogative method than the other, anyway.

[explosivecombat]

All right, then.

Presumably there was something in the water that would give the rescued man the impression that there should be seaweed present, that much is obvious; he also has some idea of what that something would be, if not seaweed, and the revelation that it was, in fact, that particular something is bad enough for him to kill himself over.

Let's start by verifying whether that "something" he killed himself over is something that wouldn't naturally have been in the water. I'm going to say that its presence in the water is unnatural - basically, we're not looking at the sudden resurfacing of...I don't know, the Kraken or what have you, this is something that shouldn't have been there in the first place. Am I on track so far?

[doitrockapella]

Now I'm going to suggest that you to be more specific. I like to hear your rationale, but I'm only going to answer questions in the affirmative or the negative — and given the multitude of considerations available to "Am I on track with everything I've said so far", all I can give you in response is "Yes and no".

[explosivecombat]

Regarding the unnatural nature of whatever it was in the water, primarily; that would be the main concern right now. If you would like something more specific, I'll suggest that it was something with him when he ended up in the water himself.

[doitrockapella]

Then yes, it was something with him when he ended up in the water.

[explosivecombat]

...you know, you're particularly morbid today, if it's going where I suspect it is.

Was he alone before this incident that left him near-drowned?

[doitrockapella]

Am I?

He was not.

[explosivecombat]

Well, that depends, doesn't it - was the second person alive at the time that the man was recovered?

[doitrockapella]

Yes, they were.

[explosivecombat]

That does change things a bit; I can see why you required a more specific answer earlier, given the ambiguity presented by "killing himself" - assuming, that is, that it wasn't suicide but rather an attempted rescue that wasn't carried through. But that can wait for a moment - I want to verify something about the entire seaweed business first.

The second person - they weren't long-haired, by any chance, were they?

[doitrockapella]

They were.

The way I first heard it, she had long dark hair, in fact.

[explosivecombat]

And if I had to hazard a guess, I'd say she also can't swim worth a damn.

Whether she could or not, however - she ended up in the water and got dragged under by the current, given that this is the sea we're talking about; at that point, our rather unfortunate hero dove in to save her but was unable to find her properly. At one point he grabbed something, but thought it was seaweed and released it immediately; he only realized after the fact that it may have been the woman's hair.

Once he had it confirmed that it wasn't seaweed at all, he went back to try to find her and ended up drowning himself. Is that it?

[doitrockapella]

It's a less morbid deduction than the one I was told. Regardless, you've got the key elements right; the scenario that follows from the way they're retold is usually subject to the imagination of the detective.

In the version given me, the man gets in over his head in attempting to find the woman, and from weariness starts to sink under himself. He spots the fishing boat, summons one last burst of strength, and starts propelling himself toward safety — when seaweed ensnares his ankle and nearly drags him under.

Fortunately for the man, he frees himself with a kick.

[explosivecombat]

[...CARMEN.]

And here I was, trying not to be morbid for once by avoiding the suggestion that he kicked his companion in the head due to being ensnared.

[doitrockapella]

I never said the man who told me these riddles was a nice one. He wasn't so thoughtful about sparing me the morbidity.

[explosivecombat]

Fair enough, and I'll keep that in mind, should you have any others.

Was this person someone you knew back home?

[doitrockapella]

That's right. I don't know what it was that brought him to mind today. The heat, maybe. It was hot like this the last time I saw him.

[explosivecombat]

Who was he, in relation to you? If I can ask.

[doitrockapella]

I suppose you could call him a nemesis. He would've used a different term, I think. But maybe the best way of putting it is, "Someone I'd like to forget, but shouldn't."

[explosivecombat]

I understand that rather well, actually - wanting to forget someone but knowing you shouldn't, that is. In my case the "wanting" is a bit of a moot point anyway.

What sort of term would he have used?

[doitrockapella]

He would've called me "student".

[explosivecombat]

And was it a matter of that having never been the case, or did something go sour at some point?