159 réponses à ce sujet

[thegreateski]

Jawson . . . most atheist you meet are actually "Deists"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

[Jawson]

thegreateski wrote...

Jawson . . . most atheist you meet are actually "Deists"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

I know, they just prefer the title "Atheist", that was my point, it's just an image they like to project. To each his own.

[Bryy_Miller]

Obviously proof of a liberal media.

[Raiil]

Tirigon- I said nothing of them being useless. Again, speaking as someone who walked away from the church and organised religion a long time ago, I know that many churches in my local area self-fund and work soup kitchens in the next town over, which is much poorer, as well as donating time, money, and effort to helping the locals there. I have known many arrogant, self-righteous pricks who are religious on Sundays and impious the rest of the week. I also know many who don't preach, but reach out to any person who may need help, offering food and shelter because they feel that they are loved by their Creator and that they should share that love and resources with the less fortunate.





As for Dawkins, he spouts his beliefs and pats himself on the back for being so intelligent and elite. Much like Focus on the Family spouts their beliefs and pats itself on the back for being so righteous and above. The man is in love with the sound of his own voice. He refers to himself being hostile to religion. And it's one thing to respectfully disagree that one's beliefs are correct, at least to the self, and another to stand on a soapbox and browbeat, harrass, decry and dismiss those who feel differently. That is how wars are started- to believe that only yourself can know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That is hubris, and that has caused more death, destruction, and damage to this world than any religion, political system, or set of beliefs.

[bibgar]

Jawson wrote...

thegreateski wrote...

Jawson . . . most atheist you meet are actually "Deists"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

I know, they just prefer the title "Atheist", that was my point, it's just an image they like to project. To each his own.

Wow! That's a bit like saying most the Christians I meet don't really beleive in God, but just want to hedge their bets in case there actually is one.

Wow! That's a bit like saying that most Catholics only have faith because of the associated guilt piled on them by the structure of a very highly organised religion,

Wow! Thats a bit like saying most theists are nothing but small minded, illogical individuals that have been conned into conforming to an archaic and an antiquated system of irrational beliefs.

However, that would all be off topic. I agree with the OP, but realise that there are constraints of how many dialogue choices could be provided. That being said, at moments such as the one in the Lothering Chantry, there should have been a dwarf-specific / dalish-specific option to delcine the tithe, and perhaps even progress that aspect of the lore by revelaing how those cultures view the human-centric Chantry.

[Tinnic]

I think the OP missed the point. When a religion is as much the fabric of daily existence as the chantry is of the people of Feralden, belief or unbelief is not important. It's more about culture and tradition. In that way the options given to the warden is accurate. You either respect culture and tradition or spit on it. You don't have to believe in the maker to support the chantry. You support the chantry because it is an integral part of your culture. Whether you believe in the Maker, know the chant of light or believe anything is irrelevant.



I guess this must be hard for those from secular societies to wrap their heads around as almost all their culture would have secular origins. But you must understand that it was not always thus. Granted that the Dalish Elf and the dwarves wouldn't be part of chantry culture but even with them, it is more about respecting culture then religion.

[Raiil]

Actually, I think the OP didn't. Why can't there be an 'other' option? Hell, my PC believes in the Maker but doesn't support the Chantry at all. The Chantry may be interwoven into Ferelden culture- that doesn't mean you have to believe or understand it. A Dalish Elf who's rather relaxed on religion and humans might want to make their position clear without being offensive. That's as important to immersion as having the '**** your God' or a 'MAKER MAKER MAKER' option. Three of the origins flat out have nothing to do with the Chantry, and two have every reason to absolutely despise the Chantry- it's only the Human Noble who really doesn't have an obvious reason to dislike them. Not to say that they can't, of course, but it's not ingrained like it is with the Dalish, or simply foreign to them, like the Dwarves. Mages and City Elves have good reason to hate them, or be ambivalent towards the institution as a whole.

[Sarah1281]

The problem is, though, that all the 'don't ****** people off, respect the culture' lines make you sound like Leliana.

[Swordfishtrombone]

Tinnic wrote...

I think the OP missed the point. When a religion is as much the fabric of daily existence as the chantry is of the people of Feralden, belief or unbelief is not important. It's more about culture and tradition. In that way the options given to the warden is accurate. You either respect culture and tradition or spit on it. You don't have to believe in the maker to support the chantry. You support the chantry because it is an integral part of your culture. Whether you believe in the Maker, know the chant of light or believe anything is irrelevant.

I disagree - even in the most monolithic society, if it's larger than a small village, there's more than one "culture", and something that's shared by most, is unlikely to be shared by all.

Further, in ferelden the Chantry clearly does not represent a uniform culture! The elves have good reason to resent the Chantry, and the dwarfs are largely unfamiliar with it. Even within the chantry there's dissent - even Leliana's views aren't exactly orthodox, and Alistair isn't exactly towing the line either.

The artifact-researcher in Denerim (I forget her name) has some interesting ideas that make her seem like a skeptic waiting to blossom.

I wouldn't even insist on having a respectful atheist position represented in the dialogue options specifically - it would be enough to have an option for respectfully opting out of supporting or agreeing with Chantry claims. Dialogue options could be given that were compatible with both the "respectful atheist" and non-conformalist, well intentioned believer.

You CAN disagree with a major institution of your society without spitting on it, and I think you should be able to do that within the game's dialogue options too.

[Swordfishtrombone]

thegreateski wrote...

Jawson . . . most atheist you meet are actually "Deists"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

Um... no. I don't think so. Most atheists I meet are certainly atheists. Of course there are people who confuse terms, and don't understand what an atheist is, and mistakenly call themselves atheist, but those are in the minority.

And being an atheist does not mean that you don't believe in "anything greater than you"  - it means only that you don't believe in a god or gods. There are many things greater than me - the ecosystem around me, the Earth, the Solar system, the Universe, and possibly even a multiverse of which our universe is a tiny speck. I am regularly awed by these things, and just because I don't worship them, or believe in there being a greater intelligence that put it all there, doesn't make me somehow consider myself the pinacle of existance.

[sleepingbelow]

I'm going to quietly say that I would also like to see some dialogue options that the OP talks about, and then I'm going to quietly back out of the room because the temperature is rising.

[Tinnic]

Swordfishtrombone wrote...

Tinnic wrote...

I think the OP missed the point. When a religion is as much the fabric of daily existence as the chantry is of the people of Feralden, belief or unbelief is not important. It's more about culture and tradition. In that way the options given to the warden is accurate. You either respect culture and tradition or spit on it. You don't have to believe in the maker to support the chantry. You support the chantry because it is an integral part of your culture. Whether you believe in the Maker, know the chant of light or believe anything is irrelevant.

I disagree - even in the most monolithic society, if it's larger than a small village, there's more than one "culture", and something that's shared by most, is unlikely to be shared by all.

Further, in ferelden the Chantry clearly does not represent a uniform culture! The elves have good reason to resent the Chantry, and the dwarfs are largely unfamiliar with it. Even within the chantry there's dissent - even Leliana's views aren't exactly orthodox, and Alistair isn't exactly towing the line either.

The artifact-researcher in Denerim (I forget her name) has some interesting ideas that make her seem like a skeptic waiting to blossom.

I wouldn't even insist on having a respectful atheist position represented in the dialogue options specifically - it would be enough to have an option for respectfully opting out of supporting or agreeing with Chantry claims. Dialogue options could be given that were compatible with both the "respectful atheist" and non-conformalist, well intentioned believer.

You CAN disagree with a major institution of your society without spitting on it, and I think you should be able to do that within the game's dialogue options too.

Why do I get the feeling that you are arguing based on what you believe to be true and not what actually is. You posts smack of someone who understands things in an abstract way but has never actually lived in a country where the culture is pretty much defined by religion. Well, I am from a country where the culture is defined by religion and I assure you, the lines are blurred and you trying to unravel them just makes you look like a dick. Even when you do not follow the majority religion, most people still have very little qualms about going along with many aspects of the religion because its part of the culture and only time they don't is if going along violates a tenant of their religion.

This is the way it works. Feralden is a certain way. You cannot change the way Feralden is. In Feralden even Anders the-mage-who-ran-away-from-the-circle-seven-times thinks its a stupid idea for mages to move away from the Chantry. In Feralden, the closest thing to respectful atheist is Wynn, who goes ballistic if you defile the Ashes of Andrasta. In Feralden, you either support the chantry whether you believe in the maker or not, or you are dicks to them. There is no reason either the Dalish or the Dwarves would have a problem with this either. Their choices when interacting with the Chantry is the same as those who interact with Dalish Elves and the Dwarves of Ozrimmar, be respectful of their culture and beliefs or spit in their faces. IMO, telling the reverend mother politely that you think her belief is hogwash is the same as telling her outright that her belief is hogwash. The net effect is the same. You are spitting on her beliefs and culture. If you want to be a respectful atheist, then don't go anywhere near a chantry. That's the only way you can be a respectful.

[webbedfeet]

Jawson wrote...

thegreateski wrote...

Jawson
. . . most atheist you meet are actually "Deists"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

I
know, they just prefer the title "Atheist", that was my point, it's
just an image they like to project. To each his own.

.....as someone who thinks the universe beginning with no creator and no  particular reason except a very, very lucky coincidence is a bastardly beautiful thing, goodsir, I rather resent this. Personally, I see that as a reasoning used to explained atheists by people who really can't imagine a world without a higher being, and that's fine. I can see why such a world might be difficult to imagine (I grew up in a culture whose main religion has no gods, so the concept that you actually needed one kind of surprised me the first time I realized this).  For those of us who actually live that way, though, it's quite a bit offensive. The most religious thing you could suggest many of us are would be 'agnostic', and even then that would offend people.

To get back on the topic : I think the options we have are fine, although the one at Andraste's ashes made me cringe. Couldn't we choose not to defile the ashes, but not to promote it either and get a decent quest ending without killing a man my PC respects, even if he's religious and my character is not? Maybe I haven't poked enough in the dialogues, but still, I'd like to lie and say it ain't there. (In the end I just usually leave the High Dragon alive. Poor pilgrims, but there it is.) You usually have the option to be evasive about your religious affiliations in most of the dialogues or just change the subject entirely, which is what I often IRL when spending time in religious areas anyway. Ferelden's highly religious, so I think it would actually be quite OOC to be able to renounce the faith in an honest, non-abusive or non-evasive manner, anyway. It's quite consistent with the world.

EDIT is for a rather odd thing in post formatting. WTF, forum code.

Modifié par webbedfeet, 17 avril 2010 - 06:50 .

[Raiil]

Tinnic wrote...

Swordfishtrombone wrote...

Tinnic wrote...

I think the OP missed the point. When a religion is as much the fabric of daily existence as the chantry is of the people of Feralden, belief or unbelief is not important. It's more about culture and tradition. In that way the options given to the warden is accurate. You either respect culture and tradition or spit on it. You don't have to believe in the maker to support the chantry. You support the chantry because it is an integral part of your culture. Whether you believe in the Maker, know the chant of light or believe anything is irrelevant.

I disagree - even in the most monolithic society, if it's larger than a small village, there's more than one "culture", and something that's shared by most, is unlikely to be shared by all.

Further, in ferelden the Chantry clearly does not represent a uniform culture! The elves have good reason to resent the Chantry, and the dwarfs are largely unfamiliar with it. Even within the chantry there's dissent - even Leliana's views aren't exactly orthodox, and Alistair isn't exactly towing the line either.

The artifact-researcher in Denerim (I forget her name) has some interesting ideas that make her seem like a skeptic waiting to blossom.

I wouldn't even insist on having a respectful atheist position represented in the dialogue options specifically - it would be enough to have an option for respectfully opting out of supporting or agreeing with Chantry claims. Dialogue options could be given that were compatible with both the "respectful atheist" and non-conformalist, well intentioned believer.

You CAN disagree with a major institution of your society without spitting on it, and I think you should be able to do that within the game's dialogue options too.

Why do I get the feeling that you are arguing based on what you believe to be true and not what actually is. You posts smack of someone who understands things in an abstract way but has never actually lived in a country where the culture is pretty much defined by religion. Well, I am from a country where the culture is defined by religion and I assure you, the lines are blurred and you trying to unravel them just makes you look like a dick. Even when you do not follow the majority religion, most people still have very little qualms about going along with many aspects of the religion because its part of the culture and only time they don't is if going along violates a tenant of their religion.

This is the way it works. Feralden is a certain way. You cannot change the way Feralden is. In Feralden even Anders the-mage-who-ran-away-from-the-circle-seven-times thinks its a stupid idea for mages to move away from the Chantry. In Feralden, the closest thing to respectful atheist is Wynn, who goes ballistic if you defile the Ashes of Andrasta. In Feralden, you either support the chantry whether you believe in the maker or not, or you are dicks to them. There is no reason either the Dalish or the Dwarves would have a problem with this either. Their choices when interacting with the Chantry is the same as those who interact with Dalish Elves and the Dwarves of Ozrimmar, be respectful of their culture and beliefs or spit in their faces. IMO, telling the reverend mother politely that you think her belief is hogwash is the same as telling her outright that her belief is hogwash. The net effect is the same. You are spitting on her beliefs and culture. If you want to be a respectful atheist, then don't go anywhere near a chantry. That's the only way you can be a respectful.

Most of the Fereldens are Andrastians by default, not by any deeply held beliefs. That leaves a lot of wiggle room for a) outsiders native Ferelden atheists and c) people who don't hold strictly to Chantry doctrine. This isn't an issue of black versus white. Hell, in the dialogue both ambient and in conversations, there's a lot of diversion between True Believers, those raised in the faith but not particularly religious, and those who don't believe in it at all. You even have a mix between your companions. Leliana is devout (in her own special way), while Oghren obviously doesn't believe and Alistair is irreverent most of the time.


And there is plenty of reason for someone who isn't devout or a believer at all to not want to lead someone on. Maybe they're trying to make their own beliefs clear. Maybe they're respectful but don't want someone trying to convince them on religious grounds. Some of us just like to troll (of which I tend to be shamefully guilty with Chantry people). They could just be curious- the Dalish Elf I plan on rolling next is going to be curious about human society, without wanting to be disrespectful. And throughout history, there have been plenty of cases of open schisms and heresy within western religions, which the Chantry seems to be based off of. Granted, they tended to end badly for the heretics, but they still existed. Atheists were rare but not unknown, particularly in intellectual circles. Arguing that 'religious is important' is moot. No one is arguing that. What some of us are asking for, later down the line, is more options beyond 'I  the Maker' and 'I pee on your beliefs and then feed them to my dog.' A grey area would be nice.

[Tinnic]

Valentia X wrote...

Most of the Fereldens are Andrastians by default, not by any deeply held beliefs. That leaves a lot of wiggle room for a) outsiders native Ferelden atheists and c) people who don't hold strictly to Chantry doctrine. This isn't an issue of black versus white. Hell, in the dialogue both ambient and in conversations, there's a lot of diversion between True Believers, those raised in the faith but not particularly religious, and those who don't believe in it at all. You even have a mix between your companions. Leliana is devout (in her own special way), while Oghren obviously doesn't believe and Alistair is irreverent most of the time.


And there is plenty of reason for someone who isn't devout or a believer at all to not want to lead someone on. Maybe they're trying to make their own beliefs clear. Maybe they're respectful but don't want someone trying to convince them on religious grounds. Some of us just like to troll (of which I tend to be shamefully guilty with Chantry people). They could just be curious- the Dalish Elf I plan on rolling next is going to be curious about human society, without wanting to be disrespectful. And throughout history, there have been plenty of cases of open schisms and heresy within western religions, which the Chantry seems to be based off of. Granted, they tended to end badly for the heretics, but they still existed. Atheists were rare but not unknown, particularly in intellectual circles. Arguing that 'religious is important' is moot. No one is arguing that. What some of us are asking for, later down the line, is more options beyond 'I  the Maker' and 'I pee on your beliefs and then feed them to my dog.' A grey area would be nice.

Allow me to put it this way and maybe you and the OP will get why the options are fine they way it is. The OP cited two instances where he wanted to be a "polite atheist". Firstly, Lothering - in this case the reverent mother was not asking you for tithe because she thought you believed in the maker, she could care less, she asked because, as she said, you looked like you could spare some. All my character (all elves, one mage, one dalish and the last being a city elf) paid-up, only my mage elf asked for a blessing and the request surprised the reverent mother because, as she says, elves don't generally join chantry services. This is despite the fact that the Alienage elves seem to need Chantry support to get married and the likes. So really, the "polite" thing to do is just pay up. If my memory serves the "here's money" dialogues weren't particularly religious in flavour. They were just "here's 30 silver" or something like that. Whichever way, you can either not afford to give her tithe or you are a dick for withholding money that you can spare from a charity just because it happens to be chantry based.

Secondly, helping open a chantry in Ozrimmar. You can decline the quest by pleading atheism or simply for being a follower of a different faith. Sten was in my party and jumped-in with a the Qun and I had the option of agreeing with him and backing off. That's the point in which to state your unbelief or simply different belief. However, if you accept the quest and successfully complete it, then either just say "I want a plague" (not a particularly jerky response IMO) or just say that you felt you were doing the right thing. Which is what the "I serve maker" comment is actually getting at. I understand that some people might have preferred a "Your welcome" type neutral option but the quest ends the moment you tell Burkel he has permission.  The option to get a plague or just tell him how happy you were to serve the maker doesn't come up unless you go to see him in his new chantry. If you want to role play a guy who helped him out because you believe in freedom of religious expression, then just don't go see him again in his new chantry!

[asaiasai]

I usually just ignore the Chantry just like the religious folks in real life. I like to put it like this i believe in god just none of the pre packaged franchised versions avaliable on the market today. There are many roads to god, organized religion is a toll booth so it is with this mentality i usually play. When accosted by a pamphlet waver in a parking lot i am polite in my refusal to accept thier literature, under no circumstances do i engage them in dialog, i do not even stop walking to my car. I used to answer the door for the bell ringers naked with Iron Maiden playing in the background, but that seemed to cause more traffic, either for another look, or because the dangerous heathen is on the loose, it did not solve the problem. When in game i tend to look at it as what it is a bussiness transaction, here is you 30 silver, i need the key to the cage and sister Leliana will explain why your going to give it to me. As an older individual i have a tendancy to respect people's religion so long as they keep it to themselves, so long as they are content with a polite refusal all is good if not, i will try and turn the tables by questioning the inconsistencies of thier belief system that is alot of fun too, why what you believe is bull**** in 100 words or less.



Asai

[Swordfishtrombone]

Tinnic - there's a perfectly valid and good reason a principled a non-religious person might want to agree to help establish the chantry in the dwarven city. The dwarven city is very restrictive in what you are supposed to think and what not - they have a lot of predudices and rigid tradition that does not easily allow difference. I - and my character - see value in diversity, and see the non-censorship of ideas, even ideas I don't like, as a core value.

That's why an atheist might want to help set up the chantry in a place like the dwarven city, and why it's not that clear cut that aggreing to do so automatically makes you religious.

For my first playthorugh, I actually played a character that WAS religious, though not overtly so, so I didn't pay that much attention to the lack of the kinds of dialogue options I'm seeing now, on my second playthrough, when I am trying to play the sort of a person that's closer to what I'm like in real life. The example from the chantry at the orzammar city, with two dialogue options so extreme, was just so striking that I noticed it even though I was playing a religious character.

That's why only two examples so far - the Lothering one I noticed now on my second playthrough, and I haven't gone that far into the game yet.

I haven't lived in an overtly religious society, but I have lived in a predominantly religiuos one - for a year, I lived as an exchange student in Canada, and went to a catholic school. It was an interesting experience, but I did not feel any need to promote traditions that I felt uncomfotable promoting, AND staying respectful at the same time. I also spent a few weeks a few years ago as a visitor in a Buddhist monastery, participating in many aspects of the monastery life. I stayed silent during chants who's words I did not agree with, chanted along with those I did - I had many interesting discussions with other visitors, and with monks and nuns, and generally had no trouble maintaining my integrity, while not offending anyone. I had a good time, and learned quite a bit. I went there because I find religions interesting, though I do not believe their supernatural claims.

It's a complete fallacy to think that you have to either go along with majority belief systems and institutions, OR be a complete jerk. An idea I find foreign and odd.

[Tirigon]

Jawson wrote...

Tirigon you have issues with you're anger, and mocking towards those who might believe there is something greater than themselves. Which is over 95% of the world btw. I find most "Atheists" I meet are not true atheists at all, they seem to have no real problem with an idea of a greater power, or a God of sorts, but have major issues with organized religion. I can't blame em there. I once was like you, obnoxious and insulting of others beliefs, and if you asked me I was a proud atheist. I'm still clueless about what's out there really, but Due to certain events in my Rl, I'm pretty sure there are things out there that weren't in my high school science book. Not being a particularly religious person myself, I could give a rats arse what you believe in, just don't sit there and pretend you have all the answers when you don't.

Good to see you know my entire psych profile, Mr Freud. 
I never realized I had anger issues, thanks for telling:kissing:



Also, I´m no true Atheist because I don´t think we can be completely sure there is no greater power or God after all. However, we CAN be sure that there is no evidence nor need for such a power. Historically, gods were mainly an explanation for things people couldn´t explain otherwise - like Zeus causing thunderstorms by throwing his thunderbolts, winter existing due to some goddess of fertility being in the underworld, humanity existing by divine creation etc...

Nowadays we have scientific explanations for all that; we don´t need a god to fill the gaps in our knowledge.
This does not mean gods can´t exist; but it means that there is no reason why a god needs to exist.

And there is no evidence for a divine being; after all, if god existed and wanted everyone to believe in him, he could simply appear and tell humanity to worship him and that all atheists and followers of the "wrong" religion suck.
The fact that he didn´t do that leads me to 3 different conclusions:

1)  (Imo the most likely) God doesn´t exist  = no reason to worship a god.

2) God exists, but doesn´t care what humans believe  = still no reason to care for him.

3) God exists but is powerless  = no reason to worship a powerless thing.

No matter which of this explanations is true, they all lead to the point where you have to see that the agnostic POV with strong tendencies to atheism is the most rational "faith".

Not to mention that practical atheism means your freedom isn´t limited by religious rules, what is definitely another bonus.


And the fact that many people have issues with organized religions COULD maybe be linked to all those fundamentalist brainless asses who think it´s cool to blow others up cause they don´t believe in the "true" god, or to those christian priests who abuse their position to rape children, or to those idiots who kill doctors performing abortions etc..., don´t you think?

[Swordfishtrombone]

Tirigon wrote...

Also, I´m no true Atheist because I don´t think we can be completely sure there is no greater power or God after all.

But "true" atheism requires you to believe no such thing. Most atheists, and I would argue that all atheists who have put a little more than superficial thought into it, don't claim to know that there is no god - atheism/theism is not about knowledge, it is about belief. So if you don't believe that there exists a god or gods, whatever your reasoning, whatever your level of certainty or uncertainty, you are by definition an atheist.

I find it helpful to avoid this misunderstanding of the term to distinguish between an agnostic atheist and a gnostic atheist - an agnostic atheist like me doesn't believe there exists any gods, but does not claim to know either way. A gnostic atheist would be one that would claim to know for certain that there exists no gods, and that position I find quite as unjustified as the position of the gnostic theist - one that claims to know for certain that there exists a god.

If atheism required absolute certainty that there is no god, you'd have to disqualify most, if not all public atheists as not atheists at all.

I think you CAN reasonably be a gnostic atheist only with regards to particular god claims that are self-contradictory. So, for example, if someone tells me that their god is a square circle, I can confidently say that I know that their god does not exist, at least not in the way they believe.

Usually though, god is vaguely defined, and thus the best you can do is give good reasons to suspect that such a being does not exist, and point to a lack of evidence. But this cannot justify a claim of knowledge.

[Tirigon]

Valentia X wrote...

Most of the Fereldens are Andrastians by default, not by any deeply held beliefs. That leaves a lot of wiggle room for a) outsiders native Ferelden atheists and c) people who don't hold strictly to Chantry doctrine.

It doesn´t matter what you are by default. In Germany, most people (or at least most people who are not immigrants) are "by default" Christian. I for example are, legally, a Roman Catholic because I didn´t bother to leave the church but simply stopped believing in it or going to church. But after reading my other posts you won´t say I´m a ctholic, would you?!

And it´s similar with many other people. Just because you are something by default doesn´t mean you really ARE it. It just means you have it written in your passport.

Anyways, according to my experiences I believe the Church does only have so many members because you are baptized in the very early childhood when you can´t disagree yet. It says much that in my class at school there are a lot of atheists, but practically no devout christians, at least not devout to the big churches; if only to some small christian groups. AND that is on a christian school that doesn´t allow non-Christians in and was a school for priests only 60 years ago.....

[Tirigon]

Swordfishtrombone wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

Also, I´m no true Atheist because I don´t think we can be completely sure there is no greater power or God after all.

But "true" atheism requires you to believe no such thing. Most atheists, and I would argue that all atheists who have put a little more than superficial thought into it, don't claim to know that there is no god - atheism/theism is not about knowledge, it is about belief. So if you don't believe that there exists a god or gods, whatever your reasoning, whatever your level of certainty or uncertainty, you are by definition an atheist.

Well, I always thought if you have the position that you can´t know whether or not god exists makes you agnostic, not atheist.
Ultimately it doesn´t matter much, though, whether it´s agnostic or agnostic atheist.

[Swordfishtrombone]

Tirigon wrote...

Well, I always thought if you have the position that you can´t know whether or not god exists makes you agnostic, not atheist.

That's a common source of confusion, I think. Agnosticism is not an in-between position between atheism and theism, it's apples and oranges. I know that some people use the word that way, but I think calling yourself just an agnostic does not actually fully answer the question of what you believe.

Saying that you are an agnostic answers the question "do you  know that there exists, or doesn't exist a god?" if the answer to that is "no", you are an agnostic. All atheists I know are agnostics. Most of the more moderate theists are agnostics.

Saying that you are an atheist (or a theist) answers the question "do you believe that there exists a god?"

The two terms answer different questions, and thus are not incompatible. So what you describe of yourself, you do seem very much like an agnostic atheist to me.

[Reaverwind]

bibgar wrote...

 That being said, at moments such as the one in the Lothering Chantry, there should have been a dwarf-specific / dalish-specific option to delcine the tithe, and perhaps even progress that aspect of the lore by revelaing how those cultures view the human-centric Chantry.

Agreed - and those options didn't necessarily need to be overly hostile or insulting. The Dalish reply to the priest in Ostagar comes to mind - "And if you don't, the Maker destroys your homes and kills your brothers?" - a nice ironic reply that doesn't go out of the way to insult and refers to past history (Exalted March on the Dales).

[Swordfishtrombone]

Reaverwind wrote...

bibgar wrote...

 That being said, at moments such as the one in the Lothering Chantry, there should have been a dwarf-specific / dalish-specific option to delcine the tithe, and perhaps even progress that aspect of the lore by revelaing how those cultures view the human-centric Chantry.

Agreed - and those options didn't necessarily need to be overly hostile or insulting. The Dalish reply to the priest in Ostagar comes to mind - "And if you don't, the Maker destroys your homes and kills your brothers?" - a nice ironic reply that doesn't go out of the way to insult and refers to past history (Exalted March on the Dales).

I don't think that such dialogue options should be restricted to a species - after all, I'm incenced by, say, the taleban treatment of women in Afganistan, despite me being neither a woman, or Afgani. I think that especially for a mage character, who's spent his/her life studying in the mage tower, it would make sense that they'd be aware of history, and hold more nuanced views.

[Mlai00]

@ Swordfishtrombone:

You don't seem to get it no matter how much Tinnic repeats herself. Fereldan is like Medieval Europe. Where the Church is a fact of life, like Gravity.

Whatever your personal views, you do not "politely disagree" with the Revered Mother when she asks for a tithe for the Chantry, just like you do not "politely disagree" with the tax collector when he asks for taxes for the King. Either you make up an acceptable excuse, or you put up fightin' words.

Leliana and Alistair are poor examples. Lel is essentially a heretic. Alistair doesn't like Templar life, but that doesn't mean he disbelieves in the Maker.