647 réponses à ce sujet

[Thiefy]

The Qunari kind of remind me of ants.

Don't ask me to explain it, it just makes sense in my head.

[cglasgow]

Medhia Nox wrote...

I admire order over individuality. I believe individuality breeds complete selfishness - I believe capitalism is the ultimate form of selfishness and individuality. Greed is good after all.

And I believe that you're overlooking the Fallacy of the Excluded Middle.

The ideal society is neither complete submission to order or complete anarchy; it is a balance where rights and freedom are measured carefully against responsibilities and duties.

And no, that's not the Qun.  Or Kirkwall.

But Kirkwall, as much of a pit as it is, actually has odds of evolving towards that balance faster than the Qun does... because Kirkwall at least allows people to change.

Modifié par cglasgow, 22 mars 2011 - 07:26 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Lithuasil wrote...
c) Continue existing - A collective society, where nobody is pulling the strings and deciding what's best, is an anthill. The sole purpose of the Anthill is to continue it's existence. Eat. Reproduce. Die, without any higher ambition or purpose (since such would always have to be initiated by individuals, rather then by society as a whole). At this point, the members of such a society are no longer sentient beings, since they no longer use their conscience.

The sole purpose of every single livng organism in our world is continued existence. There is no other purpose for anything living. This has nothing to do with sentience at all. All of us, no matter how much we try and paint ourselves differently and unique, are all slaves to the one universal rule of life: Survival. 
The Qunari view their society as a living thing, hence they want its continued existance. How do you ensure continued existance? You erase competition. Hence the aggressive expansion of the Qunari.

The Qun is amazing because it gives you purpose. Where a man not of the Qun, would be struggling under the rule of survival, a Qunari is not bound by it, because his purpose is the survival of the Qun. If his death would ensure Qun survival he would gladly give it.
And what is this about you claiming the Qunari believes thining is "too hard" as you put it? The Qun assign your role in society, you are however free to choose within this role.

[PantheraOnca]

cglasgow wrote...

PantheraOnca wrote...

I would say that the qunari allowing for more outside-the-box thinking is closer to happening than human lands' value every citizen and provide them with work.

"They can never vary from that assigned path, never be other than they are meant to be." -- The Arishok.

Yeah, that really sounds like a society that thinks outside the box.  They live in the box.  The box is their one true god.

did i say that they thought outside of the box? no, i didnt. i said that the qunari will think outside of the box before the humans value every person and provide them with work.

as far away as the qunari are from outside-the-box thinking, the humans are farther away from valuing their own.

also, in order to invent one must have innovation, and if innovation is allowed, the ability to change one's systems exists.

[cglasgow]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And what is this about you claiming the Qunari believes thinking is "too hard" as you put it? The Qun assign your role in society, you are however free to choose within this role.

In addition to the part already discussed where the tamassran don't have any guarantee to actually know what role you're best suited for but are instead burdened with their own preconceptions and superstitions, there's also the part where 'Your only choice is to succeed or fail' is not really a choice.  That's like throwing me out a window and telling me I have the choice to either grab onto something on the way down, or fall and break my legs on the sidewalk.  Some choice!

It's only a free choice if, in addition to 'succeed' or 'fail', you also have option three: 'you know, I don't think I like this one.  Can I go do something else?'

Modifié par cglasgow, 22 mars 2011 - 07:29 .

[cglasgow]

PantheraOnca wrote...

also, in order to invent one must have innovation, and if innovation is allowed, the ability to change one's systems exists.

I might point out that in our real-world history, the culture that invented gunpowder was Earth's most static culture of that millennium (and the next one!), not one of its more dynamic.

[Medhia Nox]

I'm not excluding it - rather I'm using the Qunari and Kirkwall as two extremes and stating which one I would lean toward.

The Qun appeals to me more than the greedy anarchism of Kirkwall. I didn't say I would join the Qun (I have before - but it isn't true, I don't know enough about them to know whether or not I would).

And while we're both entitled to opinion - nothing can actually be stated as "Fact" as to what is the ideal society.

[cglasgow]

It may be impossible to factually state what is the perfect society, but its entirely possible to factually state what isn't. God knows that history is full of examples of 'Oh yeah, that definitely didn't work out well.'

So the problem, while perhaps incapable of finding the One True Answer, can at least be solved to the extent of 'Well, we've narrowed it down to being somewhere in this range, and we definitely don't want to go over there, or there, and dear God not that way.'

Modifié par cglasgow, 22 mars 2011 - 07:39 .

[Medhia Nox]

What is your view of a static culture cglasgow - because China is an amazing contributor to the world as far as inventions go.

Isolationism is not the same as being "static".

You can't possibly be saying that for the last two thousand years China has been static? 

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 22 mars 2011 - 07:39 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

cglasgow wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And what is this about you claiming the Qunari believes thinking is "too hard" as you put it? The Qun assign your role in society, you are however free to choose within this role.

In addition to the part already discussed where the tamassran don't have any guarantee to actually know what role you're best suited for but are instead burdened with their own preconceptions and superstitions, there's also the part where 'Your only choice is to succeed or fail' is not really a choice.  That's like throwing me out a window and telling me I have the choice to either grab onto something on the way down, or fall and break my legs on the sidewalk.  Some choice!

It's only a free choice if, in addition to 'succeed' or 'fail', you also have option three: 'you know, I don't think I like this one.  Can I go do something else?'

Succeed or fail is the only real choice you will ever get. If you are given a duty, but denies and crave another, you have failed in your duty.

[Lithuasil]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
The sole purpose of every single livng organism in our world is continued existence. There is no other purpose for anything living. This has nothing to do with sentience at all. All of us, no matter how much we try and paint ourselves differently and unique, are all slaves to the one universal rule of life: Survival. 
The Qunari view their society as a living thing, hence they want its continued existance. How do you ensure continued existance? You erase competition. Hence the aggressive expansion of the Qunari.

The Qun is amazing because it gives you purpose. Where a man not of the Qun, would be struggling under the rule of survival, a Qunari is not bound by it, because his purpose is the survival of the Qun. If his death would ensure Qun survival he would gladly give it.
And what is this about you claiming the Qunari believes thining is "too hard" as you put it? The Qun assign your role in society, you are however free to choose within this role.

If that's honestly what you believe, there's not much more to say, other then that I honestly feel deeply sorry for you.

[cglasgow]

Medhia Nox wrote...

What is your view of a static culture cglasgow - because China is an amazing contributor to the world as far as inventions go.

... its social system, system of government, and mores remained remarkably constant for over 2000 freaking years, while other civilizations came and went?

Dude, tech level != cultural dynamism.

Modifié par cglasgow, 22 mars 2011 - 07:45 .

[cglasgow]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Succeed or fail is the only real choice you will ever get. If you are given a duty, but denies and crave another, you have failed in your duty.

Duty is something you are supposed to choose to assume, not something you are demanded to fulfill only in this one predetermined role!   And even if you owe duty to X just by being born, you are still supposed to be allowed to choose in what manner you will serve X!

Good Lord, even the freaking military draft of the 60s allowed you to say 'But I don't want to kill people!  It's against my religion!  Can I go be a hospital corpsman instead?'   You might have been stuck with being in the military, but even then you could try for a different MOS.   And that's the draft, not 'this is what is done to every citizen, civilian or not'.

Modifié par cglasgow, 22 mars 2011 - 07:45 .

[Statulos]

cglasgow wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

What is your view of a static culture cglasgow - because China is an amazing contributor to the world as far as inventions go.

... its social system, system of government, and mores remained remarkably constant for over 2000 freaking years, while other civilizations came and went?

Dude, tech level != cultural dynamism.

Claude Levi-Strauss demonstrated that your last assertion is simply not true. 

[Medhia Nox]

Did they? They were communist for 2000 "freaking years"?

China is one of the world's oldest civilizations. It has persisted for nearly 4000 years.

What, if not longevity, is a sign of "What works?"

China has been Imperial probably for the longest period of its history. During that time, Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism have all made large sweeping changes throughout China. Chinese "religions" are as much philosophical thoughts and forms of government (notably Confucianism).

"The Analects" talk of "The Gentleman" (that's the Westernized name for it) and the duty of The Gentleman to the State, to the Self, and to the Other. It is very similar to "The Nichomachean Ethics" written by Aristotle to his son.

Lao Tzu is attributed with the Tao Te Ching and is a philosophical cosmology that permeated much of Chinese wisdom and was largely integrated into Buddhism when it migrated out of India.

Again - what's been static about China? And why hasn't it worked for China since it has existed as one of, if not the, oldest nation on the world (and currently suggesting it might become a world power after 4000 years). If after four millennium your nation is only now heading toward a 'peak' - then I might argue that it's a pretty successful nation.

[cglasgow]

Sure... if you believe Claude Levi-Strauss.

[cglasgow]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Did they? They were communist for 2000 "freaking years"?

... no, they were Imperial China for over 2000 years.  As you already knew.

What part of 'ancient China' did you miss?  Was the part where we were talking about the era in which they invented gunpowder not enough of a clue?  Seriously, stop playing word games.   They invented gunpowder while at the same time being a dictatorship that did not want to change any aspect of their culture or society, and in fact kept themselves free of such major change for millenia.  Q.E.D.

What, if not longevity, is a sign of "What works?"

I thought we were debating what was right, not what was functional.   The functionality of many forms of evil is not in dispute.   Doesn't mean I'd want to live there anyway.

In case you need it spelled out even more; I reject the notion that making the trains run on time is a higher value than allowing people the freedom to try and find their own path in life, instead of having all-powerful priest-kings dictate their choices for them.

Modifié par cglasgow, 22 mars 2011 - 07:57 .

[Lianaar]

Right. If you feel lost and have no place in life. If you have the questions of why but no answers. If chaos pushes you down and life itself seems pointless, then the Qun can give an answer (same way the Chantry gives a different answer or Dalish give an answer).

Many people need a place, a security. What that security is, matters little. In the Qun you'll always be someone. You will have a place and you'll be looked after. You must seek the best of the community, but you are part of that community. You can never part from your role, but you have a role, a goal, a purpose. There is a reason in life.

[Lithuasil]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Again - what's been static about China? And why hasn't it worked for China since it has existed as one of, if not the, oldest nation on the world (and currently suggesting it might become a world power after 4000 years). If after four millennium your nation is only now heading toward a 'peak' - then I might argue that it's a pretty successful nation.

Such a successful nation in fact, that we can safely assume no one in this thread or even entire forum would want to live there.

[Lithuasil]

Lianaar wrote...

Right. If you feel lost and have no place in life. If you have the questions of why but no answers. If chaos pushes you down and life itself seems pointless, then the Qun can give an answer (same way the Chantry gives a different answer or Dalish give an answer).

Many people need a place, a security. What that security is, matters little. In the Qun you'll always be someone. You will have a place and you'll be looked after. You must seek the best of the community, but you are part of that community. You can never part from your role, but you have a role, a goal, a purpose. There is a reason in life.

But that, having to ask for someone to give you purpose, as opposed to accepting that single greatest challenge that life has to offer - that's the cowardice I belittled in the Op.

[Medhia Nox]

@Lianaar - precisely, and the Qunari "seem" to respect those amongst other nations who display this "Purpose" in action.

The Arishok admires Hawke for his purpose (though I'd argue he doesn't really have any beside watching his companions outshine him/her).

And Sten admires the purpose driven life of The Warden.

[Statulos]

cglasgow wrote...

Sure... if you believe Claude Levi-Strauss.

"Primitive" in technological terms does not equate with stagnat. Its simple as that and it has been demonstrated by people like aforementioned Levi Straus, and also Boas, Gertz, Malinovsky... In fact that is one of the few elements where basicaly every anthropologist agrees.

[cglasgow]

Statulos wrote...

"Primitive" in technological terms does not equate with stagnant.

Wait, are we even arguing the same thing anymore?

The assertion was 'being comparatively technologically advanced over medieval Thedas' does not automatically mean 'dynamic, evolving culture'.   What you're saying not only doesn't contradict that, it barely even intersects that.

[Lianaar]

It is not necessary cowardice.
The question is: what is the purpose of life?
If it is happiness, then the Qun is a good answer.
If it is ensuring that your offspring grows up safely, then the Qun is a good answer.
If it is making your self whole and learn who you are, then the Qun is no answer.
Qun is not individualistic. For anyone who holds the individuum more important then the community (and Western traditions do this) the Qun will be alian and hard to grasp. In this preset the idea of giving up yourself for the community is a sin. Meaning: you must think first and find ways to best serve the community, because YOU know how to. The Qun says: this is the best for the community. You must help the community. This is a noble idea. Everyone within the Qun is treated fairly, everyone can contribute and enjoy the fruit of that contribution. The Qunari are noble beasts, but they are more like intelligent bees then typical humans. As the Arishok said: he doesn't have the means to explain and humans don't have the means to understand.