Jalem001 wrote...
Consider this: I kill 200 people, then I save 200 people from death.
Does the latter cancel the first?
'We declare an Exalted March (for WHATEVER reason)!' - that has always ended up in taking lives.
'We build places of shelter for the poor (possibly with wealth that could have been gathered as a result of during the Exalted Marches, which are basically a from of invasion)'
Does building shelter for the poor or feeding the poor, or raising orphans (!!! some of which may have been a result OF the Exalted March) somehow make up for, or cancels an invariable result of an Exalted March, which is the loss of life?
Your argument isn't valid. Exalted Marches don't happen every other year, and for that matter you work off the basis that the Exalted March is not legitimate. There are almost certainly arguments that can be made for each Exalted March.
There have been nine Exalted Marches according to the Dragon Age Wiki. The first by Andraste herself, the second against the Elves, four against the Imperium for being "heretical", and the final three against the Qunari.
That means that the last Exalted March was over 150 years ago. Your orphan theory falls flat, especially considering that the wars against the Qunari were more than valid (Qunari were the aggressors). In addition to orphans you propose the theory that the Exalted Marches are used as some sort of fundraising scheme, however the wars and Marches against the Qunari ended because they felt it was more important to -rebuild-.
To sum it up: There is no reason to believe that the Exalted Marches cause a ton of harm to the society and civilization of Thedas. In at least four cases they clearly defended it, in one it was possibly more of an evil than a good, and in the other four we can't really judge because we don't have enough information. The examples you give aren't true to "life", and have not bearing in this argument.
Um... okay, in THESE THREE CASES they defended it. That's good, of course supposing that the other nations actually agreed to let the Chantry's Templars pass through their lands. In regards to this, you seem to think that somehow the "orphan theory" only applies to these Marches or if it doesn't hold true for these last three AS WELL then it is invalid, thus it somehow can't hold true to ANY of the previous six? Please clear that up.
Again, you are only applying my "fund-raising theory" (theories now) to the last three Marches and thing is-- it's irrelevant of whether or not it doesn't hold true to all but one of the cases, that doesn't make it invalid. That just doesn't make it true to all but that one particular case.
So... heh (this is the funny part, for me) if my questions were an argument it
would have been a valid argument, just not valid for ALL, which I never claimed in the first place (if you'd like to spin my questions around and say I'm making claims). I said "an Exalted March" and "could have been gathered during the Exalted Marches", which is easily demonstrable.
The question remains, does the good cancel the bad that the organization/institute has done and continues to do? Pulling the 'it happened 150 years ago' card doesn't work. It didn't ONLY happen 150 years ago, it happened multiple times in different ages for mutliple and/or different reason, some of which you mentioned. I could just as well say 'because of this pattern, I have no reason to believe that they WOULD NOT declare another Exalted March if the same reasons which they claimed as the justification for any one of the Exalted Marches presented themselves again'. Basically (and in the case of the elves, specifically): they did it once, NO ONE stopped them (in fact, they were practically "invited" by Orlais) , if they
feel like doin' it again, who's to say they won't? Irrespective of whether or not someone will stop them this time or even if they would actually do it. And yeah, I realize it would be harder this time as they are all spread out in clans, but again, that's irrelevant.
Retour en haut
