295 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sarah1281 wrote...

How are people being hypocrites?

Because if you are a fan of a person, who have to embrace everything about them, of course!

[Elhanan]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I would guess that many spare Loghain for this reason, yes. Just like others kill Loghain because they too think they are playing "good characters".

Haha, that put a smile on my face. All those hypocrits saying they play a "good" hero and then brutally murder someone who just surrendered. LAWFUL GOOD, huh?

These may be like the other hippos I was considering. Expectations of mercy when none is granted seems a bit off to me.

But I only spare him altogether with my Evil Wardens; the rest of mine see fit to deliver justice then ,or later with Archie.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Elhanan wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I would guess that many spare Loghain for this reason, yes. Just like others kill Loghain because they too think they are playing "good characters".

Haha, that put a smile on my face. All those hypocrits saying they play a "good" hero and then brutally murder someone who just surrendered. LAWFUL GOOD, huh?

These may be like the other hippos I was considering. Expectations of mercy when none is granted seems a bit off to me.

If you are referring to me, I always put "good" (and "evil") in quotation marks and I was not implying that those who kill Loghain are not "good".

Just thought to make this clear.

[Elhanan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If you are referring to me, I always put "good" (and "evil") in quotation marks and I was not implying that those who kill Loghain are not "good".

Just thought to make this clear.

Fair enough; The use of the term was first seen in this earlier post, and caught my attention.

[Sarah1281]

Elhanan wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I would guess that many spare Loghain for this reason, yes. Just like others kill Loghain because they too think they are playing "good characters".

Haha, that put a smile on my face. All those hypocrits saying they play a "good" hero and then brutally murder someone who just surrendered. LAWFUL GOOD, huh?

These may be like the other hippos I was considering. Expectations of mercy when none is granted seems a bit off to me.

But I only spare him altogether with my Evil Wardens; the rest of mine see fit to deliver justice then ,or later with Archie.

I still don't see why expecting a character that you feel is 'good' to spare someone when the opportunity arises when the person in question would not spare you makes you a hypocrite for feeling that the moral thing to do is show mercy.

[Elhanan]

One should not expect mercy, but may receive it. However, one should expect justice. IMO.

[naledgeborn]

Elhanan wrote...

One should not expect mercy, but may receive it. However, one should expect justice. IMO.

Keep in mind that the Idea of justice is intangible and subjective. Sh!t, the statues of "justice" outside of courthouses in the U.S. is depicted by a blindfolded woman holding an unbalanced scale.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 02 octobre 2010 - 10:45 .

[tool_bot]

naledgeborn wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

One should not expect mercy, but may receive it. However, one should expect justice. IMO.

Keep in mind that the Idea of justice is intangible and subjective. Sh!t, the statues of "justice" outside of courthouses in the U.S. is depicted by a blindfolded woman holding an unbalanced scale.

which is why I have no illusions of upholding justice when I execute Loghain. 'He was asking for it' is reason enough for me.

[Elhanan]

But I am not. Subjective; yes. But not blind; no scales.....

[zapkeet]

Elhanan wrote...

One should not expect mercy, but may receive it. However, one should expect justice. IMO.

you can';t really define Justice though.  I mean, I've always hated that word honestly >_>.  It's almost always intertwined with vengence.  To me, justice is stopping someone from doing evil, and to only kill them if you have to.  Which isn't the case with Loghain

Killing someone for what they did when they are defenseless/surrendered really doesn't seem like "justice" to me

[tool_bot]

zapkeet wrote...

Killing someone for what they did when they are defenseless/surrendered really doesn't seem like "justice" to me

So 'justice' has nothing to do with past wrongs or crimes? It's simply acting to prevent future crimes and potential wrongs?

[Addai]

naledgeborn wrote...

That's what I mean by Loghain being stubborn. He can keep thinking he's the only one that can get the job done all he wants. However he and the Warden can both agree that the job needs to get done. He lost the metaphorical dick swinging contest and he surrenders. I don't see a need to cut his head off after that. It just seems like a wasting a resource to me.

That's a legitimate game choice and I would never say otherwise.  However, there are also good reasons not to spare him.  Depending on your perspective, he may have committed a whole list of executable offenses as well as posing a risk to your party and to the country's stability.  So long as we're all clear that both perspectives are valid, that's all there is to it, really.

[TJPags]

tool_bot wrote...

zapkeet wrote...

Killing someone for what they did when they are defenseless/surrendered really doesn't seem like "justice" to me

So 'justice' has nothing to do with past wrongs or crimes? It's simply acting to prevent future crimes and potential wrongs?

I think I'm going to agree with tool_bot here.

To me, justice is punishment or reparation for past acts, not prevention of future acts, although certainly, that is a bit of a consideration.  It's paying for what you did.

If I steal your car, justice is me paying you for it - that's reparation.
If I break your arm, and you cant work, justice is compensation for your lost salary.  If I did it intentionally, justice may also mean, I lose something - like my freedom, as in, prison.  Alternatively, society can break my arm, or allow you to do it.  No, I don't mean an eye for an eye is always justice, but there is sometimes a valid degree of that involved.

Besides, someone surrendering does not always change what they did, which caused you to chase them, leading to their surrender.  Whether someone surrenders to me or I have to physically force them into a jail cell doesn't change what they did that caused me to be looking for them, does it?

[Addai]

zapkeet wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

One should not expect mercy, but may receive it. However, one should expect justice. IMO.

you can';t really define Justice though.  I mean, I've always hated that word honestly >_>.  It's almost always intertwined with vengence.  To me, justice is stopping someone from doing evil, and to only kill them if you have to.  Which isn't the case with Loghain

Killing someone for what they did when they are defenseless/surrendered really doesn't seem like "justice" to me

In a culture where the death penalty is accepted, it most certainly qualifies as justice.  Consider the ending of The Stolen Throne, where Maric and Loghain deal with the aftermath of the rebellion.

[naledgeborn]

This is my overstanding of justice. It is a direct reaction to ones actions in the form of a reward or a penalty. I'll keep it as simple as possible. I need to cross the street. If I don't look to my right or my left for oncoming traffic and I get hit by a car that is justice in the form of a penalty. If I do stop to look to my left and my right, see an oncoming vehicle and let it pass my reward or justice is not getting hit by the vehicle. People tend to over-romanticize this word.

[KnightofPhoenix]

naledgeborn wrote...

This is my overstanding of justice. It is a direct reaction to ones actions in the form of a reward or a penalty. I'll keep it as simple as possible. I need to cross the street. If I don't look to my right or my left for oncoming traffic and I get hit by a car that is justice in the form of a penalty. If I do stop to look to my left and my right, see an oncoming vehicle and let it pass my reward or justice is not getting hit by the vehicle. People tend to over-romanticize this word.

Ehhh, what if I push a rival of mine on the street just as a vehicle passes by and dies in the process without anyone noticing that I pushed him. I get rewarded for eliminating a rival and also get rewarded for shifting the blame to the driver. Both the driver and the victim did nothing to cause this, I did and I was rewarded. Is that justice?

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in idealised versions of justice, I have a very instrumental outlook on it, as a political tool to preserve order (so in essence I don't believe that "justice" is good in and of itself / instrinsically valuable). But I think you are over-simplifying here. 

[naledgeborn]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...

This is my overstanding of justice. It is a direct reaction to ones actions in the form of a reward or a penalty. I'll keep it as simple as possible. I need to cross the street. If I don't look to my right or my left for oncoming traffic and I get hit by a car that is justice in the form of a penalty. If I do stop to look to my left and my right, see an oncoming vehicle and let it pass my reward or justice is not getting hit by the vehicle. People tend to over-romanticize this word.

Ehhh, what if I push a rival of mine on the street just as a vehicle passes by and dies in the process without anyone noticing that I pushed him. I get rewarded for eliminating a rival and also get rewarded for shifting the blame to the driver. Both the driver and the victim did nothing to cause this, I did and I was rewarded. Is that justice?

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in idealised versions of justice, I have a very instrumental outlook on it, as a political tool to preserve order (so in essence I don't believe that "justice" is good in and of itself / instrinsically valuable). But I think you are over-simplifying here. 

Yes it's justice in the form of reward but it doesn't stop there. There are going to be consequences subtle or otherwise in the form of penalties for eliminating your rival that way. 

[Addai]

naledgeborn wrote...

This is my overstanding of justice. It is a direct reaction to ones actions in the form of a reward or a penalty. I'll keep it as simple as possible. I need to cross the street. If I don't look to my right or my left for oncoming traffic and I get hit by a car that is justice in the form of a penalty. If I do stop to look to my left and my right, see an oncoming vehicle and let it pass my reward or justice is not getting hit by the vehicle. People tend to over-romanticize this word.

*scratches head*  So people who die in accidents are being justly punished?

I don't think I understand you correctly.

I would instead compare justice to the guardrails that keep a car from driving off the road.  It helps establish order and protection of the whole of society, particularly of the innocent.  But all of this is a bit eggheaded.  We can clearly see what the standards and notions of justice in the game lore are, and that includes chopping off the heads of your adversaries.

Modifié par Addai67, 03 octobre 2010 - 02:47 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

naledgeborn wrote...
Yes it's justice in the form of reward but it doesn't stop there. There are going to be consequences subtle or otherwise in the form of penalties for eliminating your rival that way. 

Is there? If no one knows, I don't see how.
Unless it's karma or divine intervention.

[Addai]

naledgeborn wrote...

Yes it's justice in the form of reward but it doesn't stop there. There are going to be consequences subtle or otherwise in the form of penalties for eliminating your rival that way. 

There could be positives for doing so, as well.

[naledgeborn]

Doesn't have to be divine or spiritual. As much as I would like I can't prove those things but Newton's Laws of motion can be applied to this scenario in principle.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 03 octobre 2010 - 02:53 .

[testing123]

These definitions of justice are pretty amusing, hasn't anyone pulled out the old, 'dictionary.com says' yet?

[tool_bot]

naledgeborn wrote...

Doesn't have to be divine or spiritual. As much as I would like I can't prove those things but Newton's Laws of motion can be applied to this scenario in principle.

no. no they can't.

Unless you mean you recieve a slight push in the opposite direction of the guy you literally just threw under the bus.

[Monica21]

jvee wrote...

These definitions of justice are pretty amusing, hasn't anyone pulled out the old, 'dictionary.com says' yet?

Pfft... I always go with the Oxford English Dictionary if I can.

[naledgeborn]

Addai67 wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...

Yes it's justice in the form of reward but it doesn't stop there. There are going to be consequences subtle or otherwise in the form of penalties for eliminating your rival that way. 

There could be positives for doing so, as well.

Obviously if not he wouldn't have done it in the first place. Him eliminating his rival and placing the blame on the oncoming vehicle is his immediate reward (along with other down the road) but his actions are goin start a chain of events that would inevitably catch up to him in the form of justice ("good" or "bad".