486 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

Persephone wrote...

The Warden administers such justice and MERCY a few times? Really? If this is MERCY, I'd hate to see.....well......GOD, I simply cannot understand such a butchery.

This is the reason I mentioned the guillotine. Today we often see this as butchery; a barbaric device of death. But in the day, this allowed a faster, less painful way of death than was currently being implemented. An executioners arm could get tired, and beheadings could take many strokes. A clean, swift stroke was merciful in comparison to what was available.

And yes, killing a creature swiftly rather than see it suffer in diseased pain is merciful. Or so I thought when I saw it done by my Warden in the game, or in the film 'To Kill A Mockingbird'.

[Addai]

Persephone wrote...

Sabariel wrote...

Recruited him once. Never again. The man sold elven children into slavery. Unforgivable in my book

Then you must condemn some of the greatest men and women in history who are revered to this day. Alexander the Great, Caesar, medieval kings and queens.... American presidents.

(Husband)


from a Jonah Goldberg essay,


quote
Lord Acton — wrote, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute
power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

Of all the truisms to be found in Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, this one
may be the most revered as sheer genius on college campuses, op-ed
pages, and idiot-radio. Alas, it is usually aimed at rich, white,
conservative men and few others, but that certainly doesn't diminish the
passion or frequency with which it is invoked. And, as is so often the
case with people who replace thinking with clichés, the people who use
it are invariably wrong. Acton was actually referring to a
tendency among historians to let their judgment of Great Men be clouded
in the light of their accomplishments. Acton believed historians should
make moral judgments about the men they study. The "power corrupts" line
first appeared in a letter responding to a request for Acton to review a
history of the Popes by Creighton. Acton didn't like Creighton's
refusal to judge harshly the Reformation-era popes (a.k.a. "the bad
popes").
quote

Modifié par Addai67, 23 septembre 2010 - 01:07 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ Addai husband.
Being a history minor (and political science major), I can tell you that it is a departement policy to avoid making *any* moral judgement whatsoever regarding historical figures, events, ideologies or states...etc. Making a historical essay filled with moral judgements would guarantee you a D or C at best.

So regardless of what Acton says, history as a discipline and method is one that is devoid of moral judgements as much as possible. It is a discipline based on factual evidence to support an objective argument.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 23 septembre 2010 - 01:54 .

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

@ Addai husband.
Being a history minor (and political science major), I can tell you that it is a departement policy to avoid making *any* moral judgement whatsoever regarding historical figures, events, ideologies or states...etc. Making a historical essay filled with moral judgements would guarantee you a D or C at best.

So regardless of what Acton says, history as a discipline and method is one that is devoid of moral judgements as much as possible. It is a discipline based on factual evidence to support an objective argument.

Well said, KOP. Let me just pick Caesar as an example: Slavery back then was as normal as it is abnormal today. He was a brilliant strategist who starved out Alesia, yet was known for his clemency. (Clementia Caesaris) He has been portrayed as power-hungry tyrant and as a brilliant, much needed stateman. Ring a bell? The truth may lie in between. He too was butchered in his country's "Landsmeet" Chamber (Senate, Curia of Pompey) . Many parrallels.

[Giggles_Manically]

What KoP says is very true.



21st century thinking and ethics cant be applied to things a thousand years ago or even a hundred years ago. It was a different time and place, with vastly different views and thoughts on things.

You cant apply a modern world view on what happened in the distant past.

[Wulfram]

Do you think Loghain would spare the Warden, if he won the duel?

[Persephone]

Wulfram wrote...

Do you think Loghain would spare the Warden, if he won the duel?

No. He would not. But since Loghain is such an evil monster according to some people, why decide as he would and lower yourself to his level? :innocent:

[Monica21]

MariSkep wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Then you must condemn some of the greatest men and women in history who are revered to this day. Alexander the Great, Caesar, medieval kings and queens.... American presidents.

Why not? I can respect and recognize someone's accomplishments and still call them out on all their failings.

There's a difference between calling out failings and execution. A pretty big one. I certainly wouldn't be willing to execute America's founders because they decided to keep slavery legal, or Abraham Lincoln because he only freed the slaves in the border states.

Was Loghain wrong? Yes. Does it deserve execution? No.

[Elhanan]

Loghain deserves death for several of his number of crimes; not just one. Simply because he can stop the Landsmeet with 2-3 accusations does not erase the list of deeds on his portfolio.

[Wulfram]

Persephone wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Do you think Loghain would spare the Warden, if he won the duel?

No. He would not. But since Loghain is such an evil monster according to some people, why decide as he would and lower yourself to his level? :innocent:

But if you admire him as others here seem to, then you're obliged to kill him or be a hypocrite

[Monica21]

Elhanan wrote...

Loghain deserves death for several of his number of crimes; not just one. Simply because he can stop the Landsmeet with 2-3 accusations does not erase the list of deeds on his portfolio.

Oh, you mean his retreat at Ostagar because it was lost? Or trying to talk Cailan out of fighting with the Wardens which is what eventually led to his death? Or the poisoning of Eamon that left him unconscious but not dead? I think we'll have to agree to disagree on his "crimes."

Modifié par Monica21, 23 septembre 2010 - 03:19 .

[Persephone]

Wulfram wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Do you think Loghain would spare the Warden, if he won the duel?

No. He would not. But since Loghain is such an evil monster according to some people, why decide as he would and lower yourself to his level? :innocent:

But if you admire him as others here seem to, then you're obliged to kill him or be a hypocrite

Just because I admire the man does not mean I have to agree with him all the time.

[Persephone]

Monica21 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Loghain deserves death for several of his number of crimes; not just one. Simply because he can stop the Landsmeet with 2-3 accusations does not erase the list of deeds on his portfolio.

Oh, you mean his retreat at Ostagar because it was lost? Or trying to talk Cailan out of fighting with the Wardens which is what eventually led to his death? Or the poisoning of Eamon that left him unconscious but not dead? I think we'll have to agree to disagree on his "crimes."

I agree, Ostagar is too much of a grey area to be labeled a crime. And had he wanted to kill Cailan, he'd have URGED him to fight on the front lines rather than telling him not to again and again. Duncan himself should have told Cailan to stay away from the front lines. Sedating Eamon wasn't a crime per se, but I detest Eamon, so maybe my view isn't exactly unbiased. Some call blaming the Wardens for the King's death a crime. But he is actually right. It was too dangerous for Cailan to play hero on the front lines. I recently accused him of leaving Cailan to die (At the Landsmeet).......DAMN, the heartache in his voice......and one can accuse Loghain of MANY things but he isn't a faker.

[Elhanan]

Monica21 wrote...

Oh, you mean his retreat at Ostagar because it was lost? Or trying to talk Cailan out of fighting with the Wardens which is what eventually led to his death? Or the poisoning of Eamon that left him unconscious but not dead? I think we'll have to agree to disagree on his "crimes."

Or the hundreds to thousands he lft to die with Cailan; the majority of the army. Or hiring the Crows to assassinate the remaining Wardens who were witness to his crime. Or allowing Howe to take over in Denerim, and the deaths that occured with him in power. Or any of the deaths that occured while allowing Tevinter slavers into the Alienage. Or the deaths that occured in Lothering when he forces the troops away from that location. Or any of those lost gaining Jowan as a poisoner. Etc.

He is resposible for the crimes and resultant deaths of not only his own actions, but also those of his subordinates he refuses to keep in check. If Ferelden law merits capital punishment for these crimes, Loghain deserves death. And I agree, IMO.

[Giggles_Manically]

I dont agree though.

Ostagar is to grey to judge, and outside of the slavers what he did was not above what other monarchs would do.



However when Riordian, you know the guy with 20 times the experience as a warden tells you: THERE ARE COMPELLING REASONS TO SPARE HIM, I listen. Riordian has no reason that you can see right away to spare him, yet he wants him spared.

[Zjarcal]

I gotta admit, Riordan's advice has little to no influence on me. I like Riordan, a lot, but his advice wouldn't change whatever opinion I had.

[Wulfram]

"I only sent the blood mage to poison him a little bit" seems a pretty rubbish defence to me.

[Elhanan]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I dont agree though.
Ostagar is to grey to judge, and outside of the slavers what he did was not above what other monarchs would do.

How would we know, as our monarch lies dead at Ostagar, and is not the egocentric general that is attempting to take the throne?

However when Riordian, you know the guy with 20 times the experience as a warden tells you: THERE ARE COMPELLING REASONS TO SPARE HIM, I listen. Riordian has no reason that you can see right away to spare him, yet he wants him spared.

True; experienced and next one on the US list. But am I the only one to find it sorta funny that this Loghain defender is from Orlais, is he not?

And I have listened a few times, but not as a City or Dalish Elf, or as a Human noble, or as any Dwarf; just as a Mage. I tend to play these Best Harrowing Ever Wardens as slightly precognative in their dealings. Only my evil Mage allowed Loghain to live past the eplilogue, I believe. My thought was to have him perform the DR, but I took this route myself as a way to influence future events on the throne. But I have played now so many times, my storylines become blended.

[Giggles_Manically]

I know that feeling I am working on my 14th,15th, and 16th run right now and its hard to remeber who did what.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Those arguing that Ostagar is a crime. Again, the Landsmeet doesn't believe you. So you may think you are punishing him for Ostagar, but this is not a mandate provided to you by the Landsmeet as they don't recognise the "crime". This can be qualified as vigilantism, which isn't necessarily a bad thing (batman fan here). But you do not have a legal mandate to do it.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 23 septembre 2010 - 04:08 .

[Elhanan]

I have never brought this up at the Landsmeet; no need as Anora does it for me.

[MKDAWUSS]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I know that feeling I am working on my 14th,15th, and 16th run right now and its hard to remeber who did what.

There is that "story" feature on the online profile for your character. I know that doesn't include deleted characters and it sometimes features outdated info, but...

[Monica21]

Elhanan wrote...
How would we know, as our monarch lies dead at Ostagar, and is not the egocentric general that is attempting to take the throne?

Because your egocentric general is not attempting to take the throne. He wants it for his daughter, who is, in my opinion, the best equipped to take it.

True; experienced and next one on the US list. But am I the only one to find it sorta funny that this Loghain defender is from Orlais, is he not?

Stationed in Orlais, but born in Highever.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Elhanan wrote...

I have never brought this up at the Landsmeet; no need as Anora does it for me.

It's not clear if they actually believe her. I think the point was more like the Queen was opposing Loghain, rather than the content of her argument.

Because they reject the Ostagar argument when you say it, despite the fact that you were at Ostagar.
So either they don't necessarily believe Anora's argument but that's irrlevent, the point is that she as the Queen opposing him. Or they actually believe that Anora can provide an analysis of Ostagar and an account of what happened, despite not being there, while someone more qualified to give that account is not even considered as valid.

The latter would make the nobles of the landsmeet even more idiotic than they already seem to be.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

@ Addai husband.
Being a history minor (and political science major), I can tell you that it is a departement policy to avoid making *any* moral judgement whatsoever regarding historical figures, events, ideologies or states...etc. Making a historical essay filled with moral judgements would guarantee you a D or C at best.

So regardless of what Acton says, history as a discipline and method is one that is devoid of moral judgements as much as possible. It is a discipline based on factual evidence to support an objective argument.

(husband)

Well the point I was getting at was a human tendency that Acton was describing, namely the tendency to pardon the evils and faults of historic figures because of their past achomplishments.


As far as the moral judgements thing goes...   Yes I know neutrality is an objective but in many ways that is an outdated paradigm.  (The Tabla Rasa ideal is a product of the bygone age of the Enlightenment).   With movements like Postmodernity, multiculturalism, moral judgemennts are back in.   At least they are in the US and Europe if you are talking about things like how blacks were enslaved, Sexism, Racism, the treatment of Native Americans etc.

Modifié par Addai67, 23 septembre 2010 - 04:39 .