1072 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

Torax wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

And generally at this point most of the threads dealing with blood magic, the circle, the chantry. basically anything regarding the mages seems to hit some personally and I'm not sure why. I played the game and didn't find myself caring so much about it.

It hits home in some people, because of the underlying issue of: What is most important, safety or freedom? Which in our modern day, is quite  abig issue in many countries. To see it abstract and transformed in agame creates a forum, where many can vent their feelings on the matter, in an inconsequential manner.

[Torax]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Torax wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

And generally at this point most of the threads dealing with blood magic, the circle, the chantry. basically anything regarding the mages seems to hit some personally and I'm not sure why. I played the game and didn't find myself caring so much about it.

It hits home in some people, because of the underlying issue of: What is most important, safety or freedom? Which in our modern day, is quite  abig issue in many countries. To see it abstract and transformed in agame creates a forum, where many can vent their feelings on the matter, in an inconsequential manner.

Maybe I am just not seeing the logic though of attempting to rip apart the story that is before you by throwing in things and trying to apply them to a World where they don't exist or fit. Seems a futile waste of time. Wanting to vent and then trying to make it a facade of being either constructive or useful really it isn't either.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

IanPolaris wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Considering Wynne also goes on to say the Litany is a spell and can only be used by a mage, it's even stanger Adralla would be a bard...but go figure, no one ever said Adralla created the Litany for her own use.

This was back when they could cross-class.

Wynne in DAO is more wrong than right.  Wynne claims a lot of lore (very authoritatively too such as only one Grey Warden mage) that are laughably wrong.  In a conflict between the codex and Wynne, we should take the Codex entry (and it's written by the Chantry fwiw) every time.  Also Wynne does tell you that the Litany is a spell and Dragon Age Bards are rogues and thus can't do spells.

Wynne is (as usual) wrong.  Adralla was a renegade bloodmage.  The Chantry just tries to duck that issue as much as they can.

-Polaris

And once again, pretentious claims with no basis in fact.

"I AM RIGHT BECAUSE THE CHANTRY CODICES ARE ALWAYS BIASSED AND WYNNE HAS BEEN OBVIOUSLY WRONG ON OTHER STUFF SO SHE HAS TO BE WRONG HERE TOO!!" is not a compelling argument; it makes you into as much a spin-monkey as the fictitious organisation you like to beat on.

You entirely dismiss the claims of the only NPC who talks about her. You choose to only half-believe the only Codex entry and state the parts you don't like are wrong, not because you have any actual proof on what the truth is but because doing things your way naturally villifies the Chantry and proves what bastards they all are.

Whether or not you are correct about Adralla being a blood mage, you have nothing to stand on but speculation and your own personal bias. That's a poor way to argue lore.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 10 avril 2011 - 01:46 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Torax wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Torax wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

And generally at this point most of the threads dealing with blood magic, the circle, the chantry. basically anything regarding the mages seems to hit some personally and I'm not sure why. I played the game and didn't find myself caring so much about it.

It hits home in some people, because of the underlying issue of: What is most important, safety or freedom? Which in our modern day, is quite  abig issue in many countries. To see it abstract and transformed in agame creates a forum, where many can vent their feelings on the matter, in an inconsequential manner.

Maybe I am just not seeing the logic though of attempting to rip apart the story that is before you by throwing in things and trying to apply them to a World where they don't exist or fit. Seems a futile waste of time. Wanting to vent and then trying to make it a facade of being either constructive or useful really it isn't either.

That is the most common issue with these kind of debates. People are unwilling, or unable, to leave behind their real world beliefs and standards, and thus can't fully "immerse" themselves in the discussion. For instance the "basic human rights" arguement which has been going on here. A pointless arguement as such things simply does not exist in Thedas. Perhaps they should, but they don't. They didn't exist in our world either, untill well into the 20th century.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 10 avril 2011 - 01:48 .

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

Oh *sigh of relief*... thank the Maker.... For a moment I thought there were actual civil discussions and people were being proven wrong legitimately! Boy am I glad that fear is gone.

[Torax]

 I dedicate this song to the OP.

[EthanDirtch]

Okay, so, um, I've only read the dev replies and their snippets to IanPolaris' msgs, so I'm not exactly sure on what level can I actually chime in here, but since it's a public forum post in a public forum...

I think the issue of 'regulating' or 'teaching' mages isn't wrong, it's just handled wrong. I think, just like IanPolaris says that you cannot punish someone for what they COULD be, you cannot also simply absolve certain people for justifying what they DO do as for the protection of the public. Meredith is herself wrong, but the Templars and the Circle aren't. It's just like how Anders is wrong, but mages as a whole aren't.

While we cannot compare this issue to any real life situation (and I totally agree with David Gaider here; no human so far as we know can--with a wave of a hand--rain down fire or lightning at his/her whim), I can compare it to several issues from other media, namely the X-Men.

Collaring, killing, or 'curing' mutants never worked, but if they policed themselves it sorta balances out. To a degree.

I think, in the end, you cannot say all templars are bad, just like you can't say all mages are bad, and JUST like you can't say all circles are bad. The Ferelden Circle, for example, had a nice balance with Irving and Gregoir. The Circle in Kirkwall could have really benefited with Thrask as their Knight-Commander.

As to the original issue of 'legality', when the Viscount and the Grand Cleric are both dead, and with tempers and tension at an all time high, add onto that the very stupid stupid stupid thing that Anders did, a lot of people would not have faulted Meredith for believing she had to take the action she did, even if they do not entirely agree with her before or in hindsight. She had a city to protect, and she had to make a decision on the spot; she knew she'd get no help any time soon. She's still insane, though!

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

The discussions over the mages and the templars never reach a consensus.

[LobselVith8]

Torax wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

And generally at this point most of the threads dealing with blood magic, the circle, the chantry. basically anything regarding the mages seems to hit some personally and I'm not sure why. I played the game and didn't find myself caring so much about it.

Considering how personally you involved yourself in this thread, those comments are quite a surprise.

[IanPolaris]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

The discussions over the mages and the templars never reach a consensus.

If one can not agree that mages are people and need to be treated as people with basic dignity and not as things, then no agreement will ever be reached.  The concept of human rights does exist in Thedas.  Otherwise there would be no outrage over slavery or how the Orlesian Chevaliers treated the Fereldan peasentry during the occupation.  That understanding may be in the embryonic stages, but it's there and has been for almost a thousand years (since Andraste anyways).  This is deliberately done so that DragonAge can appeal to a modern audience.  Thus it's perfectly valid to say that if mages are people, they need to be treated AS people and not as dangerous items to be abused and discarded at a whime.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

IanPolaris wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

The discussions over the mages and the templars never reach a consensus.

If one can not agree that mages are people and need to be treated as people with basic dignity and not as things, then no agreement will ever be reached.  The concept of human rights does exist in Thedas.  Otherwise there would be no outrage over slavery or how the Orlesian Chevaliers treated the Fereldan peasentry during the occupation.  That understanding may be in the embryonic stages, but it's there and has been for almost a thousand years (since Andraste anyways).  This is deliberately done so that DragonAge can appeal to a modern audience.  Thus it's perfectly valid to say that if mages are people, they need to be treated AS people and not as dangerous items to be abused and discarded at a whime.

-Polaris

If we could get Templars and Mages working together, things would be better. Maybe give all Mages a curfew? Like, "go ahead and do what you want, within the law of course, but be back by 10 p.m."

If they're not back by then, they better have a damn good alibi and proof to back it up. Sort of like mini-trials if that ever happened. They'd be given more freedom then they have, while still keeping regulation present.

It's just a rough idea, so there may be a few kinks and bugs to sort out.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 10 avril 2011 - 03:45 .

[Balitant]

IanPolaris wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

The discussions over the mages and the templars never reach a consensus.

If one can not agree that mages are people and need to be treated as people with basic dignity and not as things, then no agreement will ever be reached.  The concept of human rights does exist in Thedas.  Otherwise there would be no outrage over slavery or how the Orlesian Chevaliers treated the Fereldan peasentry during the occupation.  That understanding may be in the embryonic stages, but it's there and has been for almost a thousand years (since Andraste anyways).  This is deliberately done so that DragonAge can appeal to a modern audience.  Thus it's perfectly valid to say that if mages are people, they need to be treated AS people and not as dangerous items to be abused and discarded at a whime.

-Polaris

The Contempt for slavery could easily come from the fact that Andraste freed slaves. This is me speculating.... I admit it. You however are not admitting to your speculation that human rights somehow magically exist in thedas.

Think of it this way, there is a different history that exists in Thedas than that of our own.

(This post expresses no support for the templars or mages, I am simply annoyed by going through twenty pages here and seeing this guy talk of things he should not be so certain in.)

[Realmzmaster]

Mages are people and should have basic human rights, but their gift makes it very complicated. Consider a mage who talks in their sleep! The problem is that mages are not normal human beings. Templars become abnormal. They are not born that way.
Let me pick up on the topic of mutants as one poster did. Cyclops of the X-men is a danger to himself and anyone near him without his visor or his eyes closed. He can by mistake destroy several city blocks.
Mages can be viewed in the same light. Some can control their power, other can with training and other cannot. I do not equate mages to a weapon, but they can be accidents waiting to happen. Mages have to learn to control both unconscious and conscious thought.
The templars are there when the mage cannot.
The problem lies with human nature that some templars and Chantry members abuse their power and authority. But mages with power and authority do the same actions. There must be a balance and that is thr tricky part.

[Torax]

IanPolaris wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

The discussions over the mages and the templars never reach a consensus.

If one can not agree that mages are people and need to be treated as people with basic dignity and not as things, then no agreement will ever be reached.  The concept of human rights does exist in Thedas.  Otherwise there would be no outrage over slavery or how the Orlesian Chevaliers treated the Fereldan peasentry during the occupation.  That understanding may be in the embryonic stages, but it's there and has been for almost a thousand years (since Andraste anyways).  This is deliberately done so that DragonAge can appeal to a modern audience.  Thus it's perfectly valid to say that if mages are people, they need to be treated AS people and not as dangerous items to be abused and discarded at a whime.

-Polaris

While I agree that mages are people. Since characters in Thedas do not think is so. It is a never ending concept to argue it. So for example me pointing out how Templars or the Chantry may not consider Mages to be people. This does not mean I am endorsing their belief. It's simply stating that they think that way. You have to separate that fact when trying to debate thinking the other poster is automatically wanting to kill every mage they see. Also keep in mind to even have the concept of a Templar and system and using evil mages in the past as the birth of the Darkspawn alone required to a degree having people thinking magic is evil. The fear of magic did happen on earth as well in the past.

[Torax]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Mages are people and should have basic human rights, but their gift makes it very complicated. Consider a mage who talks in their sleep! The problem is that mages are not normal human beings. Templars become abnormal. They are not born that way.
Let me pick up on the topic of mutants as one poster did. Cyclops of the X-men is a danger to himself and anyone near him without his visor or his eyes closed. He can by mistake destroy several city blocks.
Mages can be viewed in the same light. Some can control their power, other can with training and other cannot. I do not equate mages to a weapon, but they can be accidents waiting to happen. Mages have to learn to control both unconscious and conscious thought.
The templars are there when the mage cannot.
The problem lies with human nature that some templars and Chantry members abuse their power and authority. But mages with power and authority do the same actions. There must be a balance and that is thr tricky part.

Sadly the human condition in any system would most likely lead to abuse. No matter for every kind hearted mage there could be one seeking power over others. Just like how for every nice kid there can be a bully beating them up for their lunch money. Only a Utopia would it all work and not have outliers. That or a really boring story.

[TJPags]

IanPolaris wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

alright someone fill me in on what these last 10 pages have said please

The same arguements being thrown back and forth with slight variations of "You are a fool and know nothing!" added for character. You know, the same as any thread, once it passes 10 pages.

The discussions over the mages and the templars never reach a consensus.

If one can not agree that mages are people and need to be treated as people with basic dignity and not as things, then no agreement will ever be reached.  The concept of human rights does exist in Thedas.  Otherwise there would be no outrage over slavery or how the Orlesian Chevaliers treated the Fereldan peasentry during the occupation.  That understanding may be in the embryonic stages, but it's there and has been for almost a thousand years (since Andraste anyways).  This is deliberately done so that DragonAge can appeal to a modern audience.  Thus it's perfectly valid to say that if mages are people, they need to be treated AS people and not as dangerous items to be abused and discarded at a whime.

-Polaris

Actually, no, again, that concept does not exist.

Andraste was herself a slave, which completely explains her contempt for the concept.  I would argue she marched on Tevinter to destroy her oppressors, not to end slavery.  Either way, she obviously failed - and nobody since has felt strongly enough to try it again.

The dwarves sure don't think the way you seem to argue.  They treat casteless dwarves as dirt, as sub-dwarven.  Heck, they do the same with surface dwarves.  Not privilidged?  Well, sorry, but you have no rights.  Doesn't fit with any kind of "basic human rights" ideas.

Even the elves have this problem.  Dalish elves look down on City elves as having turned their back on their people.  No respect given to them at all - at best, they're viewed as wayward children.  Certainly Dalish elves don't feel strongly enough to try to help their kin, or save them.

Then we have the Qunari - do I really even need to go into them?  Those who don't follow the Qun are less than worthless.

Now, we turn to humans.  Elves, even outside of Tevinter, are treated as slaves.  Peasants in Orlais are treated the same way.  People point to outrage in Ferelden over how they were treated - and that's what it was.  They were outraged over how they were treated - a manner much worse than they had been accustomed to.  They don't seem to feel any great sorrow for those in Orlais treated that way.  Certainly other nations don't seem to be marching on Orlais to better the plight of their peasants.

Mages, whether human or elf, are treated - well, the way they are treated.  I'm not going to again dispute whether its right or wrong.  But its how they are treated, throughout the entire world, with the exception of Tevinter.  And nobody, except perhaps mages themselves or their families, sees anything wrong with it.

There is nothing in the world of Thedas which implies that the concept of "basic human rights" exist.  We can all agree that this concept does and should exist here on earth.  We can probably all agree that it would be great if it existed on Thedas.  But it doesn't.

Discussion about the world of Thedas simply can't revolve around that concept of "basic human rights", since they don't have it.

[Torax]

I think the greatest flaw on his part is by discussing the fact that it doesn't exist there is almost treated by him as people endorsing the fact that it is not there. While some will troll him by being his counterpart and calling them slaves and so on. The fact remains that no matter what the characters of Thedas will think the way they do. Us stating that fact does not mean we want it to be that way. Just we accept that at least as far as DA2 and Origins are concerned. There is nothing we can do about it.

Lastly if the hope of said poster is to have the Writers maybe rethink this process, it's probably not best to attack them and make up things to accuse them about. To read into things that are not there. Treating the Writers with disdain and anger actually works against a cause like that. Be cordial to them or do not post at all. Would be like cussing out a GM in an mmo when you are asking them to help you with an in game problem. It only makes your chances worse.

Modifié par Torax, 10 avril 2011 - 05:04 .

[PantheraOnca]

TJPags wrote...


Actually, no, again, that concept does not exist.
/snip

Discussion about the world of Thedas simply can't revolve around that concept of "basic human rights", since they don't have it.

Actually, yes, the concept does exist. Most of the examples you cite are not examples of a lack of "basic person rights" they just show that several groups define those who get "basic person rights" differently. The Qun think those of the Qun do and should have certain basic rights. The Orlesians think the nobility have basic rights. The Tevinter think Magisters have basic rights. So on and so forth.

Just because no one has written "Thedas' list of inalienable sentient rights" doesn't mean that the concepts are not there.

[Torax]

PantheraOnca wrote...

TJPags wrote...


Actually, no, again, that concept does not exist.
/snip

Discussion about the world of Thedas simply can't revolve around that concept of "basic human rights", since they don't have it.

Actually, yes, the concept does exist. Most of the examples you cite are not examples of a lack of "basic person rights" they just show that several groups define those who get "basic person rights" differently. The Qun think those of the Qun do and should have certain basic rights. The Orlesians think the nobility have basic rights. The Tevinter think Magisters have basic rights. So on and so forth.

Just because no one has written "Thedas' list of inalienable sentient rights" doesn't mean that the concepts are not there.

While yes, the point is that in basically all those societies there is at least one part of them that have less rights or are seen as inferior. Hard to really say about Rivain but for the rest of the nations for sure.

Modifié par Torax, 10 avril 2011 - 05:13 .

[Darth Krytie]

PantheraOnca wrote...

TJPags wrote...


Actually, no, again, that concept does not exist.
/snip

Discussion about the world of Thedas simply can't revolve around that concept of "basic human rights", since they don't have it.

Actually, yes, the concept does exist. Most of the examples you cite are not examples of a lack of "basic person rights" they just show that several groups define those who get "basic person rights" differently. The Qun think those of the Qun do and should have certain basic rights. The Orlesians think the nobility have basic rights. The Tevinter think Magisters have basic rights. So on and so forth.

Just because no one has written "Thedas' list of inalienable sentient rights" doesn't mean that the concepts are not there.

Actually, I'll just point out that if the rights are "basic" to people, then they'd apply to everyone across the board with no exceptions. In our world, a basic human right is owed to everyone from the richest person alive to the most disgusting pile of waste at the bottom of the rung.

[Paeyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

If one can not agree that mages are people and need to be treated as people with basic dignity and not as things, then no agreement will ever be reached.  The concept of human rights does exist in Thedas.  Otherwise there would be no outrage over slavery or how the Orlesian Chevaliers treated the Fereldan peasentry during the occupation.  That understanding may be in the embryonic stages, but it's there and has been for almost a thousand years (since Andraste anyways).  This is deliberately done so that DragonAge can appeal to a modern audience.  Thus it's perfectly valid to say that if mages are people, they need to be treated AS people and not as dangerous items to be abused and discarded at a whime.

-Polaris

Polaris, It is sometimes hard for me to understand just what you are arguing because you always talk in such absolutes.

The Templars do recognise mages as people (at least most do).  If they didn't mages would be simply killed on sight or automatically Tranquilled with no need for Circles or towers or or anything even resembling fair treatment.

The average citizen in Thedas lives in what we consider abject poverty.  By contrast, the mages live in what could be considered relative comfort or even luxury by the standard of their culture.  It is that standard that needs to be applied.  The Kirkwall Circle is different because they treat the mages badly by the standards of their own culture.

The concept of basic human dignity is relatively new to our civilization and is often defined by the culture.  What you understand that concept to be is completely different then what the concept was understood to be even a century ago.  Child labour, for example had practically no regulation in Canada till 1938.  If even the conservative numbers are correct, 250 million children under the age of 14 are forced to work around the world even today (UNICEF).

As another example, arranged marriages in India are the norm.  When talking to a friend from India recently I asked him if that was trending downwards and he said it was, only about 80% of marriages were arranged now.  If you were to tell someone from that culture that forcing someone to marry was a violation of their rights they would probably look at you like you were insane.

Thedas has a culture and it is one that is at least three hundred years behind us in social evolution.  It also has a number of problems that we have never had.  (Mages and demons being the most obvious example).  To apply a modern standard to them, and more specifically a Western modern standard simply will not work.

There is certainly the absolute ideal of what basic human dignity are, but if were to pick ten random people from around the world and asked them what that was I suspect I would get ten different answers.  I might even get ten different answers from ten random people just in North America.  Even the Golden Rule (treat others as you would be treated) that is present in one form or another in virtually every religion in the world is both overwhelmingly supported and overwhelmingly ignored.  The only thing absolute about humans is that there are not absolutes.

There is also a very real danger of imposing one cultures values upon another.  The Ango-European idea of basic human dignity succeeded in wiping out almost all North American Aboriginal culture by the beginning of the twentieth century.  The more modernized culture always believes that their values and beliefs are superior and many of the social problem we have today are the result of North Americans (and the British Commonwealth before them) imposing those values on the cultures they encountered.

Just to be clear, I am in no way saying rape, torture, murder, genocide, slavery or the many other things we see or people perceive they see in the game are acceptable.

I am saying that the humans of earth cannot condemn the humans of Thedas for doing any of these things as we were doing the exact same things regularly at the same point in our social development.

Ultimately I agree with you that mages were treated horribly in Kirkwall by my standards.

I can even reasonably argue that they were treated horribly by their own standards.

Where does that get us?

Even if social change were to start from the moment the Circles fell we wouldn't reasonably to see substantial change for at least another century or so of social development.

[TJPags]

PantheraOnca wrote...

TJPags wrote...


Actually, no, again, that concept does not exist.
/snip

Discussion about the world of Thedas simply can't revolve around that concept of "basic human rights", since they don't have it.

Actually, yes, the concept does exist. Most of the examples you cite are not examples of a lack of "basic person rights" they just show that several groups define those who get "basic person rights" differently. The Qun think those of the Qun do and should have certain basic rights. The Orlesians think the nobility have basic rights. The Tevinter think Magisters have basic rights. So on and so forth.

Just because no one has written "Thedas' list of inalienable sentient rights" doesn't mean that the concepts are not there.

Your entire post is a contradiction.

"Basic human rights (or sentient being rights if you pefer)" is the idea that EVERY person has the same rights.

By stating the examples you do, you prove the point that the concept does not exist.  The idea that only certain people, or only certain classes of people, have rights is directly contraditctory to the idea that EVERY person has those same rights.

The Qun treats everyone differently based on their class.  The Orlesians treat nobles and peasants differently based on their class.  That completely flies in the face of the idea that EVERY sentient being has the same basic rights, since those NOT of a certain class are NOT seen as having those rights.

[PantheraOnca]

TJPags wrote...

Your entire post is a contradiction.

"Basic human rights (or sentient being rights if you pefer)" is the idea that EVERY person has the same rights.

By stating the examples you do, you prove the point that the concept does not exist.  The idea that only certain people, or only certain classes of people, have rights is directly contraditctory to the idea that EVERY person has those same rights.

The Qun treats everyone differently based on their class.  The Orlesians treat nobles and peasants differently based on their class.  That completely flies in the face of the idea that EVERY sentient being has the same basic rights, since those NOT of a certain class are NOT seen as having those rights.

It's not a contradiction. They define person differently than you or I might. This different, and I would argue wrong, definition is where the problem lies.

[TEWR]

Certainly Dalish elves don't feel strongly enough to try to help their kin, or save them.

Pol was a city elf, and they helped him. Besides, do you know how angry those damn shemlen would get if the Dalish just came into their city? I don't think that it has to do with them not wanting to help them, it's that there is too much prejudice for them to even try it and not get seriously ****ed over. Again. for a 4th time.*

*: 1) Arlathan
2) the Dales
3) The Ferelden homeland

[TJPags]

PantheraOnca wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Your entire post is a contradiction.

"Basic human rights (or sentient being rights if you pefer)" is the idea that EVERY person has the same rights.

By stating the examples you do, you prove the point that the concept does not exist.  The idea that only certain people, or only certain classes of people, have rights is directly contraditctory to the idea that EVERY person has those same rights.

The Qun treats everyone differently based on their class.  The Orlesians treat nobles and peasants differently based on their class.  That completely flies in the face of the idea that EVERY sentient being has the same basic rights, since those NOT of a certain class are NOT seen as having those rights.

It's not a contradiction. They define person differently than you or I might. This different, and I would argue wrong, definition is where the problem lies.

So, what, they don't define certain people as people?  Doesn't that, again, mean that they don't think ALL people have rights?