107 réponses à ce sujet

[Taleroth]

Riona45 wrote...

Varenus Luckmann wrote...

Don't look at me. I consider all of you idiots.

Wasn't paying heed to you at all, sweetheart.

Dude, Varenus, I think she digs you.  Go for it.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Varenus Luckmann wrote...
I love this. You consider the most zelous and fanatical of the religions the most enlightened, while claiming that the one that is generally benevolent is repressive.

Are the Qunari superior in terms of technology, social and political structure, and religion? I've seen nothing to suggest this anywhere in the setting so far. There are remarkable differences, but there can easily be found aspects that can be considered serious flaws; They cut out the tounges of their mages. Their women are forced to stay at home and never excel beyond that station. They operate under a rigid caste system where a merchant can never be become anything other than a merchant and a warrior can never become anything other than a warrior - and so on.

While "many" humans (never heard of elves converting) have indeed converted, there doesn't exist any form of religious freedoms in regions dominated by the Qun. I shudder to think how the Qunari punish religious dissidents.

As for the Qunari showing toleration for non-Qunari, I honestly have no idea what you've been smoking, but I'd love to have some. If you're thinking about Sten, then sure, individual Qunari have shown tolerance, but just because you don't start strangling the head of your local church while visiting doesn't mean that you're tolerant. The Chantry isn't tolerant, just because Wynne, Leliana or Alistair tolerate Sten - which they do, despite his obvious loathing for their religion. If you sacrifice yourself in the end, Sten even ends up as a General, leading attacks on human lands.

While the Chantry, as a church, haven't been particulary nice to, say, the elves, it doesn't mean that the Chantry - as a religion - in inherently evil or "GO SMITETH THINE ENEMY WITH LARGE METAL OBJECTS UNTIL THEY SING! SING! SING!"; The same cannot be said about the Qun.

"Zeal" is not a negative connotation. There is little point in using it as an insult. Every religion, and ideology, has fanatism, the Qun is not the only one. How do you know that the Qun is not benevolent to its own people? I am sure it has charity and whatever other help it can provide to its people.

The Qunari have cannons and the like, clearly showing they are superior technologically.
The chantry turns mages into inhuman things called tranquils. I would rather have my tongue cut out. Plus, they cut the tongue out only when the mage performs forbidden magic.
Women can excell, just not on the battlefield. They can be artists and poets and the like.
The caste system is the only thing I would object to, but Sten's explanation of it is reasonable. Plus, the Qun religion seems to be philosophically superior, according to what I have read and from what Sten says. No "bride of the maker" nonsense.

But yes now I remember that those who do nto convert to the Qun are not tolerated, you are right. But many have converted and lived happily with the Qunari. The Chantry doesn't tolerate those who do not abide by their religion either.

I never said that the chantry religion is evil. I say it's stupid. While thew Qun philosophy seems to be wiser and more enlightnened. If I were to choose between the two, I would be a Qun.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 03 décembre 2009 - 08:46 .

[Herr Uhl]

Taleroth wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

Varenus Luckmann wrote...

Don't look at me. I consider all of you idiots.

Wasn't paying heed to you at all, sweetheart.

Dude, Varenus, I think she digs you.  Go for it.

Smooth as always I see...


Of course the chantry has power, but is that a bad thing?

And reformists are going to appear, see Tevinter, and I spy with my little eye a basis for a plotline to a game/book.

[Taleroth]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

Varenus Luckmann wrote...

Don't look at me. I consider all of you idiots.

Wasn't paying heed to you at all, sweetheart.

Dude, Varenus, I think she digs you.  Go for it.

Smooth as always I see...

Like silk.

Of course the chantry has power, but is that a bad thing?

And reformists are going to appear, see Tevinter, and I spy with my little eye a basis for a plotline to a game/book.

Tevinter?  Reformists?  I guess you're right.  The fact that you can free the circle from the Chantry if you're playing a Mage is also reform of a sort.

[Riona45]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

"Zeal" is not a negative connotation. There is little point in using it as an insult. Every religion, and ideology, has fanatism, the Qun is not the only one.

"Zeal" is a pretty neutral word, but "zealot" does imply fanaticism.  Just because every idealogy will attract some zealots doesn't mean that is something desirable.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Riona45 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

"Zeal" is not a negative connotation. There is little point in using it as an insult. Every religion, and ideology, has fanatism, the Qun is not the only one.

"Zeal" is a pretty neutral word, but "zealot" does imply fanaticism.  Just because every idealogy will attract some zealots doesn't mean that is something desirable.

I never said it was desirable. I say it's inevitable that every ideology will have zealots. But to say that a religion is only comprised of zealots is a fallacy. Of course, our limited human nature will have us see alien ideologies and religions as just made of zealots and fanatics.

[Herr Uhl]

Taleroth wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...
Of course the chantry has power, but is that a bad thing?

And reformists are going to appear, see Tevinter, and I spy with my little eye a basis for a plotline to a game/book.

Tevinter?  Reformists?  I guess you're right.  The fact that you can free the circle from the Chantry if you're playing a Mage is also reform of a sort.

You give the Orlesians a reason to invade! Loghain disapproves -53

[Riona45]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said it was desirable. I say it's inevitable that every ideology will have zealots.

 
Fair enough.  However, your statement seemed to imply that since it the Qunari aren't the only people to have zealots, it's unfair to call them out on it.  That's how I saw it--I could be wrong.

[Thomas9321]

Varenus Luckmann wrote...

Thomas9321 wrote...

ExistsAlready wrote...

Thomas9321 wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Thomas9321 wrote...

The Exalted Marches, yes were wrong but they are anicent history

Tell that to the Dwarven epilogues.

I've yet to see an ending where it actually happens, as opposed to just considering. Discounting events that may or may not happen, the Chantry, as it is in game is benevolent.

If I remember, giving Branka the Anvil and having Harrowmont as King results in her eventually raiding the surface to make more Golems when Harrowmont denies her more dwarves. The humans lead an Exalted March on Orzammar and seal them off from the surface completely.

I believe you might be right there, considering I have gotten than ending myself, I should have remembered. However, in that case, the Chantry is fully justified as far as I am concerned. Frankly, I think the killing of Branka is one of the most morally justifiable action in the game. But I digress, in this situation the Chantry has every right to declare an exalted march on Orzammar.

Oh yeah, killing the clinically insane is totally justifiable. Totally.

They don't lead exalted marches on whims, even if some previous marches (such as the one against the elves) could easily be considered reprehensible in our moral context.

Yes, I said its moral to kill insane people, this is definitely what I said there. Branka may have been insane, but she was also a complete monster. Did you see the Broodmother? Did you hear Hespith's poem? Branka did all that, and she didn't care. She deserved to die at the Anvil for that.

I didn't say the Chantry led marches on whims. I may have miscommunicated myself here, in this case (even if you don't consider the other Exalted Marches moral), the Chnatry are fully justifiable in seeking retribution against the dwarves.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Riona45 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said it was desirable. I say it's inevitable that every ideology will have zealots.

 
Fair enough.  However, your statement seemed to imply that since it the Qunari aren't the only people to have zealots, it's unfair to call them out on it.  That's how I saw it--I could be wrong.

I think it's unfair to call only them out on it.
It's not an argument against the Qun to say they have zealots, as every other religion and ideology has the same thing.

The post I originally replied to implied that the Qun is just a religion of fanatics, while the chantry is the religion of the benevolent.

[dirtywick]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said it was desirable. I say it's inevitable that every ideology will have zealots.

 
Fair enough.  However, your statement seemed to imply that since it the Qunari aren't the only people to have zealots, it's unfair to call them out on it.  That's how I saw it--I could be wrong.

I think it's unfair to call only them out on it.
It's not an argument against the Qun to say they have zealots, as every other religion and ideology has the same thing.

The post I originally replied to implied that the Qun is just a religion of fanatics, while the chantry is the religion of the benevolent.

But we can recognize that based on religious guidelines one religion can lend itself to the creation and advancement of fanatics moreso than another.

[starwind99]

Its just tough love.

[KnightofPhoenix]

dirtywick wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said it was desirable. I say it's inevitable that every ideology will have zealots.

 
Fair enough.  However, your statement seemed to imply that since it the Qunari aren't the only people to have zealots, it's unfair to call them out on it.  That's how I saw it--I could be wrong.

I think it's unfair to call only them out on it.
It's not an argument against the Qun to say they have zealots, as every other religion and ideology has the same thing.

The post I originally replied to implied that the Qun is just a religion of fanatics, while the chantry is the religion of the benevolent.

But we can recognize that based on religious guidelines one religion can lend itself to the creation and advancement of fanatics moreso than another.

A statement which would be contradicted by history, as every ideology, religion, culture and civilisation had the same tendency to produce fanatics, depending on various events, situations...etc.

[dirtywick]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

A statement which would be contradicted by history, as every ideology, religion, culture and civilisation had the same tendency to produce fanatics, depending on various events, situations...etc.

The same tendency?  That's a bold claim.  I'd argue there is a much higher rate of fanaticism amongst the People's Temple or Heaven's Gate than amongst Taoists, for instance.

[PuffyTail]

The Chantry rubbed me the wrong way for sure, but I fault my personal views on religion for that. They didn't do anything particularly evil in the game as far as I could tell, though (unless I missed it?)

[Alex Savchovsky]

Oh, come on, drop the "evil" theme already. It was meant as a joke, related to another topic.

[KnightofPhoenix]

dirtywick wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

A statement which would be contradicted by history, as every ideology, religion, culture and civilisation had the same tendency to produce fanatics, depending on various events, situations...etc.

The same tendency?  That's a bold claim.  I'd argue there is a much higher rate of fanaticism amongst the People's Temple or Heaven's Gate than amongst Taoists, for instance.

Taoism is not a religion perse, it's a way of life and philosophy. It's more individual based compared to organised religion or political ideologies (there are different forms and branchs of Taoism), but it can still produce fanatics. A fanatic as in a person who forces his way of life on his children, or expects the same from his peers, and does not let them contemplate a different way of life.
If Taoism is to be equated with Confucianism (the 2 were created at the same time, and eventually somewhat merged), then Confucianists might produce fanatics as well. Those who are incapable of contemplating different forms of political structure...etc.

A fanatic is one who refuses to have a critical view. In other words, he has blind faith. That's all that it means. Being violent doesn't necessarily make you a fanatic.

[nicethugbert]

I guess there is competition between The Chantry and the Blood Mages? Or is it competition between The Chantry and The Fade? Or, is The Chantry struggling to protect people against Demons and Blood Mages?

[Mnemnosyne]

Thomas9321 wrote...

I didn't say the Chantry led marches on whims. I may have miscommunicated myself here, in this case (even if you don't consider the other Exalted Marches moral), the Chnatry are fully justifiable in seeking retribution against the dwarves.

In one of my endings, the Dwarves did nothing wrong other than open a Circle that was not under the control of the Chantry, and the Divine was planning an Exalted March against them.  So, it's fully justifiable for them to "seek retribution" for what...giving mages the choice of not being under their oppressive control?  Yes, very much something that needs retribution.

[dirtywick]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

dirtywick wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

A statement which would be contradicted by history, as every ideology, religion, culture and civilisation had the same tendency to produce fanatics, depending on various events, situations...etc.

The same tendency?  That's a bold claim.  I'd argue there is a much higher rate of fanaticism amongst the People's Temple or Heaven's Gate than amongst Taoists, for instance.

Taoism is not a religion perse, it's a way of life and philosophy. It's more individual based compared to organised religion or political ideologies (there are different forms and branchs of Taoism), but it can still produce fanatics. A fanatic as in a person who forces his way of life on his children, or expects the same from his peers, and does not let them contemplate a different way of life.
If Taoism is to be equated with Confucianism (the 2 were created at the same time, and eventually somewhat merged), then Confucianists might produce fanatics as well. Those who are incapable of contemplating different forms of political structure...etc.

A fanatic is one who refuses to have a critical view. In other words, he has blind faith. That's all that it means. Being violent doesn't necessarily make you a fanatic.

Moving the goalposts a bit.

You first said that any ideology has the SAME tendency to produce fanatics and suggest the ability to produce a fanatic at all is enough to invalidate my statement. Simply producing fanaticism while another produces it at a much higher rate based on ideology is a big difference, one I am trying to highlight.

[Alex Savchovsky]

nicethugbert wrote...

I guess there is competition between The Chantry and the Blood Mages? Or is it competition between The Chantry and The Fade? Or, is The Chantry struggling to protect people against Demons and Blood Mages?

No, it's blood mages protecting the demons from the Chantry.

[KnightofPhoenix]

dirtywick wrote...
Moving the goalposts a bit.

You first said that any ideology has the SAME tendency to produce fanatics and suggest the ability to produce a fanatic at all is enough to invalidate my statement. Simply producing fanaticism while another produces it at a much higher rate based on ideology is a big difference, one I am trying to highlight.

And I stand by my point. All ideologies have the same tendency to produce fanatics. What those fanatics do is another thing all together.
All fanatism is based on ideology. There is no fanatic that does so without having some ideological backing and justification (at least in his own mind). A Taoist fanatic would be one that is uncritical of the Taois way of life. To say that a Taoist fanatic is not a fanatic because of his ideology, is a paradox.

I do not see any empirical evidence to suggest that some ideologies or religions produce more fanatics than others, by virtue of their own ideology. First, because there is no ideology or religion that explicitly tells you "be a fanatic". Second, that fanatism is usually born because of external events, like war, invasions, poverty...etc which causes some ideologies to seemingly produce more fanatics than others. But that is limited in a timeframe and for specifric reasons. Replace that ideology with any other and put them in the same circumstances, and they will produce the same amount of fanatics.

What you are saying is that some ideologies or religions are more fanatical than others. And that is paradox in my opinion. You might think of them as irrational. Or you might not agree with them. You might think some ideologies are more violent than others. But I dont see how any ideology can be more fanatical than others. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 03 décembre 2009 - 10:07 .

[Herr Uhl]

Alex Savchovsky wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

I guess there is competition between The Chantry and the Blood Mages? Or is it competition between The Chantry and The Fade? Or, is The Chantry struggling to protect people against Demons and Blood Mages?

No, it's blood mages protecting the demons from the Chantry.

No, it is the head demon wanting to get rid of the competition.

[BlackLotus30]

To me the Maker simply don't exist because well we get no proof of it, but the thing is with the Chantry is they have "FAITH" that  does and faith goes a long way with people. The idea behind the chantry is not bad it even benevolent, but the thing that sour it for me is that it's "human controled" it's up to the inviduals in power, they control the faith (so to speak) and as we learn some can be saint and other can be evil incarnate...just look at our history.

The thing with Andraste's ashes is even more intriging, because her ashes actually work but does it mean that the Maker is real or that Andraste was something else. I think the Golden City was real but it belonged to the Old Gods not to the Maker.

My Theory is that Morrigan's child is Andraste 2.0

So the Chatry itself is not bad but the people in charge may or may not be evil, it's an invidual thing it not fair to say the chantry is Evil because the DIVINE may be evil incarnate and use his power over the church to do evil deeds.

Modifié par BlackLotus30, 03 décembre 2009 - 10:38 .

[Kuravid]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

In their own view, they are enlightnening others. And seeing that the Qunari are superior in terms of technology, social and political structure and religion (the chantry's so called "monotheism" is a perversion that makes my skin crawl, like Christianity does no offense), then I don't think they are wrong. And many humans and elves have converted to the Qun. The Qunari have shown toleration to non-Qunaris as well. The same cannot be said about elves in ferelden or Thedas in6 general.

The way Qunari go about enlightening the rest of the world involves them invading that country, overthrowing its power and forcing everyone within it to either convert to the Qun, work in prison camps or to be executed if they refuse to do either. Perhaps I'm wrong, but they don't exactly scream "integration" to me.