Talk:Mentat

Archive

Canon vs Encyclopedia

I noticed the inclusion of the latin meaning, the including of the canon source of the term by Erasmus, the removal of the latin meaning and its reinstatement. I have to admit that I do agree there is a place in the article for both canon, and for interesting (ie encyclopedic) facts about the book. My only question is whether this is known fact and can be backed up by sources, or whether this is just an assumption (A good one at that I might add) of where Frank Herbert would have gotten the term originally? Sadly, wikipedia is about verifyable and sourced facts... so unless someone can find reference somewhere to it having a latin base, it might have to be added to a different section about speculation just so that other readers do not take that to be gospel that it actually *IS* what Frank Herbert based the term on. Enigmatical 04:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

As an example,Brian Herbert has been quoted in sources as saying that the term "Bene Gesserit" was used by Frank specifically because it sounded like "Jesuit" and thus it is a verifiable source of what Frank was thinking at the time. Can a similar quote be sourced anywhere stating the same thing about the use of Mentat? Enigmatical 04:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The Dune Encyclopedia is not facts though. It is fancon, not canon. Dionyseus 04:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand that, but wikipedia is about providing not only canon information but also interesting facts and additions which people may want to read. I would like to know the source for teh dune encyclopedia... while its content may not be canon, was there any involvement of Frank Herbert at all? Could any information in there be something of interest outside of the book content itself? See my example above about Bene Gesserit. It isn't "canon" that the name was used specifically to sound like "Jesuit" and yet it certainly should be included in the article because it is an interesting fact which can be verified by other sources coming directly from those involved in the work. I dont think its fair to simply state "its not canon = it doesn't go in". For now however (and to stop an edit war) I think it best to leave it out until a source can be verified to put it in. Enigmatical 04:45, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well looking at the proposed sentence one can quickly see that it is merely a guess, an assumption, not based on facts. Here's the proposed sentence that I think does not belong in the article: The name mentat is probably derived from, or at least is reminiscent of the latin root "of the mind" (mentis). Dionyseus 04:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Comparable profession

I've read about this quite a bit. Does anyone know if there is a comparable profession in the real word, or is it completely Sci-Fi? Also, perhaps a link to the mentat wiki would be appropriate: http://www.ludism.org/mentat/ Pete Iriarte 08:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

There's no comparable profession that I can think of, though certain skills or conditions seem to fit (like idiot savants who can multiply 12 digit numbers). The closest fictional archetype I can think of Heinlein's fair witnesses from Stranger in a Strange Land.

Links to various 'mentat' web pages have typically been removed because their connection is usually tenuous at best. The Mentat Wiki in particular has been linked and removed, given that it uses the term 'mentat' only in a loose, metaphorical sense that captures the general content of the site as a place for intellectual self-help and development. If this seems overly strict, it's only because far more lunatic sites have tried link-spamming here, and the editors (myself included) are inclined towards a zero-tolerance policy to avoid arguments of degree. Justin Johnson 00:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I think an analyst would be the closest profession. Their purpose is to take in all the available information and then draw correlations and information from it. Enigmatical 22:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

True, but what really makes mentats what they are is that they do all of that in their heads. As best I can tell, and as best the people on the Science reference desk can tell, nobody has existed who could actually manage that, and even in the age of 12-step programs and magical frauds, I don't know of anyone who's ever claimed to be able to teach it. They're a very, very specialized group with a number of completely unique features, and no, they aren't real. Black Carrot 17:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

We do have the ability to extrapolate. I know that as a Systems Analyst I often "see" designs in my head and having listened to clients and read all of the available information it sometimes feels as if you are doing computations and comparaisons internally and then coming up with the relevant answers. The whole concept of a mentat is that they are able to discover patterns and perform statistical analysis that indicate the most likely reason for something or predict the most likely outcome based on available data. This is already done in various analysis jobs... but obviously not to the fantastical and fictional scale of a mentat. Still... 10,000 years of "practice" and you would have to wonder what the analysts of that era would be like. Enigmatical 22:54, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

10,000 years is a long time, surely their brains are slightly more evolved than ours. So not only do they have the proper training, their brains are perhaps superior to ours. Dionyseus 00:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Another fictitious parallel is with Donal Graeme in Gordon Dickson's book Dorsai!. Donal is an "intuitive superman", who comes to accurate conclusions as a result of an unexplored intuitive thought process far beyond the human norm, that exceeds logical analysis in every conceivable way. The parallel is actually quite strong, considering the description of the mentat mental state given by Teg and Duncan in Heretics of Dune and Chapterhouse Dune.

It's possible to view a mentat as a systems analyst multiplied by many orders of magnitude, but in the original Dune books, Herbert is quite clear that it's more than a practice, it's a cultivated mental discipline involving a particular state of mind more like Zen than anything else. This is part of the reason I'm dismissive of link-spamming to 'mentat' sites that are about memory tricks and mental organization practices. Justin Johnson 04:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

-We have to start somewhere.How else are you going to increase the quality and quantity of cognition? Consider how much cognition takes place without memory "tricks" and mental organization practices. These concepts are worth working on and contribute to mentat abilities.What else defines a Mentat other than manifestations of mental acuity derived from active mind enhancing practices? -Vulcan mentat society

Actually Zen might be a misnomer when used here. The point of zen is actually "Action without thought". Which means you have practiced something to the point where you no longer have to give it conscious thought or control to perform it. Clearly in this case its the absolute opposite and a mentat must actively engage this state and control it towards reaching their findings. I would liken it more to a Trance than anything else. Enigmatical 22:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The Mentat Mantra

I have removed the following from the article until it can be referenced; my own search of the Prelude text files comes up with no use of the key phrases in this mantra. ("acquire speed", "dream acquires form", etc.)

The original mantra is the one used by Piter De Vries in Prelude to Dune:
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by intent that thoughts acquire speed, the dream acquires form, the form pervades reality.
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

TAnthony 02:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the "original" have been the movie version? --Gwern (contribs) 02:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The mantra does not appear in any of the Dune books, including the Prelude to Dune series. The mantra that TAnthony quoted comes from the original movie. Dionyseus 02:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Popular culture

User gwern> Why did you delete my Altar of Sacrifice section and why didn't you put a motivation/explanation for it here? Altar of Sacrifice section Created on 01:11, 24 May 2007 deleted by user gwern on 01:24, 24 May 2007
62.195.208.30 20:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Because there is no reason for it to be included. If the band or whatever isn't important enough to have an article, then how on earth could a mention of Mentats by them be so important it should be included here? --Gwern (contribs) 22:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, maybe i'm off on this but why allow games to be in this article and uses of the word Mentat (mental booster) and not allow this. The group ís important, it just doesn't have an article on (the English) Wikipedia. They produce (like i mentionend and internally linked to) Gabber music wich is, to stick with your terms, 'important' and has a large Wikipedia article on several international Wikipedia editions. The Mentat sample they use is a direct extraction from the movie Dune_(film). To my opinion, the only info wich might have been a bit to extensive and irrelevant was putting the names of all individual members of the group in the Mentat article.
62.195.208.30 22:55, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Gabber seems to be a genre, no? It certainly may be notable, I don't dispute, but I still don't see why this particular group producing gabber-style music (Altar of Sacrifice) is important. --Gwern (contribs) 01:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I found the entry in question in the history, and it just doesn't fit in with the rest of the "uses in media" or etc. Uses of the word "Mentat" itself with a similar meaning to the Dune universe may be notable, but references to the Dune media itself (or samples of it) are better off in the main Dune article, if anywhere. If the musicians had sang something like "I am a Mentat, my mind is a computer", I'd agree that it belongs here. This article is about the word itself, not the media around it. Prgrmr@wrk 14:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok i guess you guys are prolly right. Thanks for explaining.
62.195.208.30 19:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Notability?

Clearly, Mentats are notable within the Dune universe, which itself is one of the most acclaimed sci-fi series in existence. I also think this article is adequately sourced, and not just an expansion on an unimportant term (which would render it not notable). In any case, I believe this user is misinterpreting the notability guidelines in this case, and I'm not sure what we do to guarantee that the article stays. TAnthony 00:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Gwern removed the tag, it's quite clear that Mentats are one of the most notable subjects of the Dune universe. Dionyseus 01:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I've added a reference to a described mentat outside of the Dune universe, this one from Marvel Comics. Appearing across several unrelated works of fiction as a similar concept should be enough to stave off any notability challenges to the article's existence. 71.225.168.28 (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

There is another in Marvel comics Sage in the Xmen: The End set of mini series refers to herself as "Mentat", I'll add something when I cross-check if this was in other more canon storylines as well Czarnibog (talk) 02:41, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Trivia removed

I've removed the following unsourced bit, which sounds like a huge stretch to me. Also, the editor had the last name as Albus, which does mean "white," but in the novels it is "Albans." TAnthony 15:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• The name of the first mentat Gilbertus Albans is a casting into Latin of Gilbert White an early English naturalist, notable for the quality and diligence of his observations.

Supra-logic

This article mentions "supra-logic". What does that mean? It is not in any dictionary and is not in Encyclopedia Brittanica. I have seen other references but only in religious contexts. Nonetheless, if the term "supra-logic" is used in this article, perhaps it should be expanded upon further and/or have a reference link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.249.47.207 (talk) 20:58, 31 October 2013 (UTC)