[Posted here so I know you both receive a notification about it.]
I think it's what most would answer if they were pressed about things that could be seen. There are also concepts that involve identifying as an animal that are not the same as therianthropy; for:
"something about this animal describes me anyway"
there's an even greater risk; people with power animals are not (automatically) therians, nor are people associated with animal archetypes. My knowledge of skeptic subculture leads me to conclude two things:
1. They are more interested in external relations and behaviors than identity. 2. They are heavily into behaviorism.
One of the central tenets of skepticism is that reality is knowable. My main concern is that if I set things up solely in the manner of identity, of something impossible to disprove, many individuals will not accept it--to them, impossible to disprove often seems to equal disproven.
This does say 'A Skeptic's Guide to Therianthropy' but I also aimed it in part at pseudoskeptics; partly because it might have some chance of success but also because it could be used to undercut them further.
That being said... your definition is probably better than mine.
Oh, and I do think of clinical lycanthropes as therians; just as the pathological version.
no subject
I think it's what most would answer if they were pressed about things that could be seen. There are also concepts that involve identifying as an animal that are not the same as therianthropy; for:
there's an even greater risk; people with power animals are not (automatically) therians, nor are people associated with animal archetypes. My knowledge of skeptic subculture leads me to conclude two things:
1. They are more interested in external relations and behaviors than identity.
2. They are heavily into behaviorism.
One of the central tenets of skepticism is that reality is knowable. My main concern is that if I set things up solely in the manner of identity, of something impossible to disprove, many individuals will not accept it--to them, impossible to disprove often seems to equal disproven.
This does say 'A Skeptic's Guide to Therianthropy' but I also aimed it in part at pseudoskeptics; partly because it might have some chance of success but also because it could be used to undercut them further.
That being said... your definition is probably better than mine.
Oh, and I do think of clinical lycanthropes as therians; just as the pathological version.