1072 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Darth Krytie wrote...
However, I'm not suggesting that oppression is a good thing or that they deserve how they are treated. I just can see where it's not a black or white situation. And the answer to the situation is probably very complicated. It's hard to find balance when you have those factors to deal with.

Isn't it?  If you can justify even to yourself and even once that it's ok to punish people for what they are rather than what they've done, then you've taken the first step towards not recognizing them as people at all, and thus anything you wish to do to them is justified.  For advanced cases see Ser Cullen and Ser Alrik.

It's evil.  It's never justified to do that.  That doesn't mean magic and mages shouldn't be regulated, but only in a way that treats them as human beings, and key to that is not punishing mages just for being mages.

-Polaris

[Darth Krytie]

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...
However, I'm not suggesting that oppression is a good thing or that they deserve how they are treated. I just can see where it's not a black or white situation. And the answer to the situation is probably very complicated. It's hard to find balance when you have those factors to deal with.

Isn't it?  If you can justify even to yourself and even once that it's ok to punish people for what they are rather than what they've done, then you've taken the first step towards not recognizing them as people at all, and thus anything you wish to do to them is justified.  For advanced cases see Ser Cullen and Ser Alrik.

It's evil.  It's never justified to do that.  That doesn't mean magic and mages shouldn't be regulated, but only in a way that treats them as human beings, and key to that is not punishing mages just for being mages.

-Polaris

You are completely deluded. Don't talk to me.

[Paeyne]

Darth Krytie wrote...

I agree that both are dangerous and you can't kill all mages because of a few rotten apples. However, of all the humans in the world, only a percentage have the personality to become a serial killer and out of those who are capable, not everyone will become a serial killer. Every single mage has the potential to become an abomination and willingness does not need to factor in. Serial killers might be predisposed toward behaviour. They may lack a conscience or emotion, but they still are aware that legally what they are doing is wrong and doing it regardless. Intent is required for serial killers.

Mages don't need intent to become abominations.


However, I'm not suggesting that oppression is a good thing or that they deserve how they are treated. I just can see where it's not a black or white situation. And the answer to the situation is probably very complicated. It's hard to find balance when you have those factors to deal with.

I agree Darth.

I also want to state, categorically, that I do not approve with the way mages are treated.  Its one thing to contain a threat (such as confining them to the Circle and supervision) it is quite another to treat them like dirt.  Not allowing them to see their families, tranquilling them on a whim or killing them without reasonable cause are all egregious crimes in my opinion.

No matter what danger they may pose, they are still people and should be treated as such.

[Darth Krytie]

Paeyne wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

I agree that both are dangerous and you can't kill all mages because of a few rotten apples. However, of all the humans in the world, only a percentage have the personality to become a serial killer and out of those who are capable, not everyone will become a serial killer. Every single mage has the potential to become an abomination and willingness does not need to factor in. Serial killers might be predisposed toward behaviour. They may lack a conscience or emotion, but they still are aware that legally what they are doing is wrong and doing it regardless. Intent is required for serial killers.

Mages don't need intent to become abominations.


However, I'm not suggesting that oppression is a good thing or that they deserve how they are treated. I just can see where it's not a black or white situation. And the answer to the situation is probably very complicated. It's hard to find balance when you have those factors to deal with.

I agree Darth.

I also want to state, categorically, that I do not approve with the way mages are treated.  Its one thing to contain a threat (such as confining them to the Circle and supervision) it is quite another to treat them like dirt.  Not allowing them to see their families, tranquilling them on a whim or killing them without reasonable cause are all egregious crimes in my opinion.

No matter what danger they may pose, they are still people and should be treated as such.

Exactly this. They are people and they do have rights. You can't just run roughshod over their humanity and their rights to exist because they could become a danger. However, not doing anything at all poses just as much danger as forcing mages into situations where they are vulnerable to being possessed.

[IanPolaris]

Darth Krytie wrote...

Exactly this. They are people and they do have rights. You can't just run roughshod over their humanity and their rights to exist because they could become a danger. However, not doing anything at all poses just as much danger as forcing mages into situations where they are vulnerable to being possessed.

Strawman.  No one is saying that magic and mages shouldn't be regulated.  That's the strawman argument to say that the circle is the only way to do that and it's not.  You yourself say that you can't run roughshod over their humanity, but the act of locking them up and punishing them for being what they are (mages) and not what they have done, does precisely this.

-Polaris

[Paeyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

 That doesn't mean magic and mages shouldn't be regulated, but only in a way that treats them as human beings, and key to that is not punishing mages just for being mages.

-Polaris

I can agree with this.

I think the Right of Annulment is terrible.  I also think war is terrible but I am flexible enough to realize that both may be necessary under extremely narrow circumstances.

Mages are dangerous.  This is a fact.

Mages are people.  This is also a fact.

Any system that does not recognize both these things is deeply flawed in my opinion.

[Darth Krytie]

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

Exactly this. They are people and they do have rights. You can't just run roughshod over their humanity and their rights to exist because they could become a danger. However, not doing anything at all poses just as much danger as forcing mages into situations where they are vulnerable to being possessed.

Strawman.  No one is saying that magic and mages shouldn't be regulated.  That's the strawman argument to say that the circle is the only way to do that and it's not.  You yourself say that you can't run roughshod over their humanity, but the act of locking them up and punishing them for being what they are (mages) and not what they have done, does precisely this.

-Polaris

And, again, the Award for Reading Things That Aren't There goes to you.

Modifié par Darth Krytie, 09 avril 2011 - 06:37 .

[Paeyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

Exactly this. They are people and they do have rights. You can't just run roughshod over their humanity and their rights to exist because they could become a danger. However, not doing anything at all poses just as much danger as forcing mages into situations where they are vulnerable to being possessed.

Strawman.  No one is saying that magic and mages shouldn't be regulated.  That's the strawman argument to say that the circle is the only way to do that and it's not.  You yourself say that you can't run roughshod over their humanity, but the act of locking them up and punishing them for being what they are (mages) and not what they have done, does precisely this.

-Polaris

The only one doing a Strawman argument is you.  No-where does she say
the Circle is the only way with dealing with mages. 

Also...  locking them up does not necessarily equal punishment.  Lots of people in our society are locked up for societies safety or theirs.  Mages are not kept in 2x6 cells with bread and water once a day and a half hour in the yard.  They are kept in a comfortable tower with fine libraries, good food and an education.  In many ways their life in the circle may be better than their life would have been outside the circle.

You agree that mages need to be regulated.

Anyone with any degree with compassion agrees that they need to be treated humanely. 

I am not sure what more you are looking for.

[IanPolaris]

Um, locking away people is considered punishment where I am from. It's also a crime for the same reason except under specific circumtances. Indeed the US constitution (as an example) specifically lists false imprisonment (the imprisonment for something you did not DO) as a violation of a person's natural rights....and that doesn't change just because you're a mage.

As for calling strawman, yes, I stand by that. It seems that everytime someone says, "The Circle system is bad" the first response from the Chantry apologist (and even Meridith says almost exactly this in the game) is, "You can not let mages run free. Tell me a better way" at this point they refuse to listen or consider any of the many examples in the world that ARE better ways.

I for one am tired of it.

-Polaris

[Tainan7509]

I never though being a mage in a game can be this troublesome, but it is a good discussion i suppose. I often play other game that has completely different view points about mage or magic after i finish DA2 in order to set it balance in my mind.

[IanPolaris]

Tainan7509 wrote...

I never though being a mage in a game can be this troublesome, but it is a good discussion i suppose. I often play other game that has completely different view points about mage or magic after i finish DA2 in order to set it balance in my mind.

A good part of the problem is that being a mage isn't troublesome as long as you are Hawke or wear the "friend of Hawke collectable pin" and it should be.  Because of that, the player never really experiences what it means to be an apostate in Templar Central (otherwise called Kirkwall).

The same goes double for bloodmage Hawke.

-Polaris

[Darth Krytie]

IanPolaris wrote...

Um, locking away people is considered punishment where I am from. It's also a crime for the same reason except under specific circumtances. Indeed the US constitution (as an example) specifically lists false imprisonment (the imprisonment for something you did not DO) as a violation of a person's natural rights....and that doesn't change just because you're a mage.

As for calling strawman, yes, I stand by that. It seems that everytime someone says, "The Circle system is bad" the first response from the Chantry apologist (and even Meridith says almost exactly this in the game) is, "You can not let mages run free. Tell me a better way" at this point they refuse to listen or consider any of the many examples in the world that ARE better ways.

I for one am tired of it.

-Polaris

I said to do nothing is bad. That does not mean the Circle is good. Given that I have an excellent grasp of the English language, I am quite comfortable using it to say exactly what I mean. I am not comfortable with your grasp of the English language as you tend to imagine meaning in things that are never explicitly stated or implicitly expressed. Anyhow, I never endorsed the Circle or endorsed preventitive punishment. Instead, I said that the right balance between the rights of the mages and the danger they pose must be an incredibly difficult thing to find.

Modifié par Darth Krytie, 09 avril 2011 - 07:04 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Paeyne wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

The guy with the knife can kill one at a time, but he can repeat that indefinitely. An area of effect spell that kills multiple victims does the same. The difference is that the guy with the knife has to work harder to kill multiple victims. Serial killers love that.

So your saying that a guy who stabs someone with a knife is the same as someone who blows up an office building.

Wow... um... I am really not sure what to say to that other than I disagree.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

The fact that a mage can be possessed doesn't make him more dangerous until after the fact. Even then only because he can kill more victims in a short time. The serial killer is also a good sample. He can kill one by one without being seen until caught. Both are just as dangerous.

A terrorist can continue blowing up office buildings until they are caught.  The mage is worse to my mind.  The terrorist at least chooses to perform his acts and can choose to stop, the possessed mage no longer has any choice in the matter and does not have the luxury of stopping until he is put down.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

The guy with the kitchen knife does not have to become a serial killer. The mage does not have to become a danger or a blood mage. It has more to do with things like personality than having access to a weapon like magic or a kitchen knife. You shouldn't lock up or kill all mages because some are rotten apples. To keep it simple: Forum users can be trolls, but not all turn into one. Although sometimes I wonder.

Owning a kitchen knife does not predispose you to being a serial killer.  Being a mage does predispose you to possession.  That does not automatically mean it will happen.  It does mean that the chances are substantially higher.

Put it this way.  Knowing everything we know about mages, would you want one living in the house next to you, working in the same office as your spouse or sitting in the seat next to your children at school.

If you can honestly say that this would not bother you, then I will just have to bow to you as the better person.

Nope. I am not saying that a guy with a knife is more dangerous than a guy who blows up an office building. However, if the guy is a serial killer than he can repeatedly kill victims and make as much casualties as the mage that uses an area of effect spell.

A terrorist can stop? Bad example. Look at what happened at 9/11. These guys have chosen to commit their final act. They too could only be stopped when put down. Unfortunately that didn't happen.

A mage can become a blood mage and be possessed because he is a mage. That's true. But there is still choice involved, a personality defect required, or whatever, to turn truly evil. The same goes for a human who becomes a serial killer. I see no differences. A mage has to learn magic and control it. You don't catch blood magic like it is some cold. It doesn't popup from nowhere. You have to learn the specific spells. Make a deal with a demon, or whatever is required. You have to be conscious of it.

I will not be comfortable when I knew that a dangerous blood mage lived next to me. I would inform the templars that I found the blood mage (only if I knew absolutely sure). But I will not tell that I also know another other mage, from who I am not sure he is a blood mage. Why should I? He has done nothing wrong. Let him be.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 09 avril 2011 - 07:05 .

[TEWR]

IanPolaris wrote...

Um, locking away people is considered punishment where I am from. It's also a crime for the same reason except under specific circumtances. Indeed the US constitution (as an example) specifically lists false imprisonment (the imprisonment for something you did not DO) as a violation of a person's natural rights....and that doesn't change just because you're a mage.

As for calling strawman, yes, I stand by that. It seems that everytime someone says, "The Circle system is bad" the first response from the Chantry apologist (and even Meridith says almost exactly this in the game) is, "You can not let mages run free. Tell me a better way" at this point they refuse to listen or consider any of the many examples in the world that ARE better ways.

I for one am tired of it.

-Polaris

The Circle system as it stands, along with the Chantry as it stands too, is what's bad. They both need to reform and start over from scratch.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 avril 2011 - 07:02 .

[RosaAquafire]

If you're a parent, you don't give your child free range of the world. You keep them within your four walls. You might set a slightly bigger boundary than that. When you take them out, they're not allowed to wander off and have to stay at your side. Why? Because children have the potential to hurt themselves. They have all the rights of an adult, but their unique situation makes them vulnerable to being taken advantage of and hurt. Now, if they were -- by no choice of their own -- dangerous, to, we'd probably keep them on an even shorter leash.

So I guess we should throw open the doors and let children roam free and do what they please, because they're human beings and it's morally wrong to obstruct their wishes and "lock them away."

This whole debate is just absurd. Anyway.

Dear IanPolaris,

I find it a little worrisome just how much energy you have dedicated to this. It was just amusing a month ago, but damn, boy, I'm becoming concerned. Why don't you expend all this energy fighting for the human rights of an actual oppressed minority in the actual world?

Love,
Rosa Aquafire

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

IanPolaris wrote...

Um, locking away people is considered punishment where I am from. It's also a crime for the same reason except under specific circumtances. Indeed the US constitution (as an example) specifically lists false imprisonment (the imprisonment for something you did not DO) as a violation of a person's natural rights....and that doesn't change just because you're a mage.

So where you are from doesn't have asylums? Or mental institutes? People can be locked away against their will because they are dangerous, to themselves and others. It might not be their fault they can go mad at times and hurt people unintentionally, but by and large putting them in a secure and safe location is better than letting them run around free and maiming/killing the occasional innocent bystander. You can be sympathetic of their plight, but would you be scared to live under the same roof as them?

Not all mages are 'mad' or lacking in self-control, and I'm not advocating that they should all be locked up, but from a certain perspective they have an incredible capacity for death and destruction if they 'lose it', even at a young age (both Anders and Wynne set things/people on fire before going to the Circle), and at a scale far beyond a regular person. Containment is not meant to be the same as punishment, although it's easy to SEE it that way and of course conditions can vary from site to site.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 09 avril 2011 - 07:07 .

[Paeyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

Um, locking away people is considered punishment where I am from. It's also a crime for the same reason except under specific circumtances. Indeed the US constitution (as an example) specifically lists false imprisonment (the imprisonment for something you did not DO) as a violation of a person's natural rights....and that doesn't change just because you're a mage.

As for calling strawman, yes, I stand by that. It seems that everytime someone says, "The Circle system is bad" the first response from the Chantry apologist (and even Meridith says almost exactly this in the game) is, "You can not let mages run free. Tell me a better way" at this point they refuse to listen or consider any of the many examples in the world that ARE better ways.

I for one am tired of it.

-Polaris

As I stated before, there are plenty of people who are confined for societies safety or their own safety who have committed no crime.  If you are advocating that they all be released because it violates their rights then I would have to respectully disagree.

No-where in her posts did Darth ever say anything about the Circle. 

If there are better ways (and I am certainly open to that possiblity) that is something that could be discussed in another thread.

[IanPolaris]

Um, children do not have all the rights of adults (because they haven't learned enough to handle those rights). If you treat all mages as children for being mages, you again punish a person for what he is rather than what he's done. To put it another way, if you lock a child in a closet at age 5 to protect him and don't let him out until age 25, that child will not be sane....and that's assuming you don't have a rather 'interesting' conversation with child protective services first.

As for Asylums, someone is still living in the dark ages. Locking somone in a mental hospital for what they are went out with the Lobotomy. Aslyums (controlled care) does exist, but it exists either on a voluntary basis or for those that have PROVEN they can't live in society without it (i.e. for what they've done). The system was changed because it dehumanized patients (and orderlies....sound familiar?) and often made bad situations worse. "One Flew Over the Cukoo's Nest" is not the way it works anymore.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Containment without cause and without redress IS imprisonment. It's why in the US constitution (again as an example) there is a strict limit to how long you can be held without charges being filed.

-Polaris

[Rockpopple]

Wow. I missed a page reading this thread.

Nevermind. Please continue.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 09 avril 2011 - 07:16 .

[IanPolaris]

Paeyne wrote...

As I stated before, there are plenty of people who are confined for societies safety or their own safety who have committed no crime.  If you are advocating that they all be released because it violates their rights then I would have to respectully disagree.

Actually in modern western societies that's no longer true.  Mental Health Hospitals were the last real example and that's been outmoded for a couple of decades (at least) now.  People can confine themselves if they choose,or can be sent away because they've proven they can't be trusted in society, but that's either a free choice or because of what they've done.

No-where in her posts did Darth ever say anything about the Circle. 

Fair enough, but that IS the most common and often only stated defense for the circle system.

If there are better ways (and I am certainly open to that possiblity) that is something that could be discussed in another thread.

Certainly.  Many have already been discussed in other threads,but always the Chantry apologists find flaws in the alternatives (and there will flaws in any system) and use even the smallest one to dismiss any idea but the Circle.  I am tired of it.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 09 avril 2011 - 07:17 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

IanPolaris wrote...

Containment without cause and without redress IS imprisonment. It's why in the US constitution (again as an example) there is a strict limit to how long you can be held without charges being filed.

-Polaris

Thedas isn't the US, Polaris. And it definitely IS in the Dark Ages.

Deal with it.

[Xewaka]

IanPolaris wrote...
Containment without cause and without redress IS imprisonment. It's why in the US constitution (again as an example) there is a strict limit to how long you can be held without charges being filed.
-Polaris

Cause: You're mage.
Redress: You're allowed to live rather than being lynched by an angry mob when you accidentally set billybob's pants on fire with your mind.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

@IanPolaris: Plus, weren't you the guy who murdered Connor (arguably an innocent mage) in DAO every single game just to 'teach Isolde a lesson'?

Should she have sent him to the horrible Circle prison or what?

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 09 avril 2011 - 07:23 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

RosaAquafire wrote...

If you're a parent, you don't give your child free range of the world. You keep them within your four walls. You might set a slightly bigger boundary than that. When you take them out, they're not allowed to wander off and have to stay at your side. Why? Because children have the potential to hurt themselves. They have all the rights of an adult, but their unique situation makes them vulnerable to being taken advantage of and hurt. Now, if they were -- by no choice of their own -- dangerous, to, we'd probably keep them on an even shorter leash.

So I guess we should throw open the doors and let children roam free and do what they please, because they're human beings and it's morally wrong to obstruct their wishes and "lock them away."

This whole debate is just absurd. Anyway.

Your perfectly sane child does not stay forever on his or her school. Once he or she finishes their education they leave and find their place in society. If you have a child with a disability or one with behavioral problems you'll find a special school which allows him or her to find their place in society. Of course there are exceptions. Some parents don't care or some children are beyond help. The same applies to mages. In Ferelden that was reality to some extent. You can find Wynne and other Circle mages in Ostagar during the start of DA:O. Nobody kept her on a leash and she wasn't tranquil. So, a lifetime punishment for just being a mage is not required.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 09 avril 2011 - 07:24 .