895 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

For reference, here are Morrigan's exact words on the subject.

Leliana: I'm wondering Morrigan... do you believe in the Maker?
Morrigan: Certainly not. I've no primitive fear of the moon such that I must place my faith in tales so that I may sleep at night.
Leliana: But this can't all be an accident. Spirits, magic, all these wondrous things around us both dark and light. You know these things exist.
Morrigan: The fact of their existence does not presuppose an intelligent design by some absentee father-figure.
Leliana: So it is all random, then? A happy coincidence that we are all here?
Morrigan: Attempting to impose order over chaos is futile. Nature is, by its very nature, chaotic.
Leliana: I don't believe that. I believe we have a purpose. All of us.
Morrigan: Yours, apparently being to bother me.

In this, we can clearly take it to mean she doesn't believe in the Maker. We also know, by David Gaider's testimony years ago, that the Elves don't worship their pantheon as being Creators themselves. They worship them as beings that were born of the earth.

And since Morrigan is talking about things existing not being equivalent to being part of a grand design by anyone -- the Maker included -- we know she doesn't worship them either.

For further reference, here is her follow-up dialogue:

Leliana: So you truly do not believe in any sort of higher power?
Morrigan: It has been bothering you, I see. No, I do not. Must I?
Leliana: What do you believe happens to you after you die then? Nothing?
Morrigan: I do not go sit by the Maker's side, if that's what you mean.
Leliana: Only those who are worthy are brought to the Maker's side. So many other sad souls are left to wander in the void, hopeless and forever lost.
Morrigan: And what evidence of this have you? I see only spirits, no wandering ghosts of wicked disbelievers.
Leliana: It must be so sad to look forward to nothing, to feel no love and seek no reward in the afterlife.
Morrigan: Yes, the anguish tears at me so. You have seen through me to my sad, sad core.
Leliana: Now you're simply mocking me.
Morrigan: You notice? It appears your perceptive powers know no bounds.

Again, she clearly states that she doesn't believe in any sort of higher power, and her words do not even suggest this talk of "implicity stating 'then me'.

Whether Morrigan's right or wrong in her beliefs regarding the Maker's presence -- or the presence of any gods aside from the Old Gods -- is irrelevant. What matters is that in her dialogue with Leliana as well as dialogue in other places she clearly leaves no room to assume she's anything other then an atheist.

[Emzamination]

Ryzaki wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I don't know. Whatever his name was in Legacy looked like an abomination to me. A thinking one but still...

He is one of the first darkspawn directly cursed by the maker.

And he used to be a magister. The fact that he reached the golden city at all was a feat worthy of gods

Plus there's no proof the "maker" cursed him. According to him the city was black when he got there. Maybe something was locked up there and it wasn't punishment at all but rather whatever it was being unleashed.

I bet he regrets existing every time he looks at that monstrocity he calls a face I would anyway

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Not even Morrigan's that arrogant. You can't just pull some interpretation like that out of nowhere.

You clearly haven't read the past several pages; they've pulled those interpretations over and over again. Then again, there was actually a poster who tried to claim atheists didn't exist in real life, so you missed out on some of the insanity as well.

[terdferguson123]

slimgrin wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Your own definition of agnosticism backs me up. Agnostics claim that divinity is UNKNOWABLE. That's a definate and positive claim.

-Polaris

It's more like, "I don't want to ****** anyone off, so I'm not claiming a stance."

Not really, it's more like I'm waiting until there is sufficient evidence one way or the other to take a side. That sounds like a well reasoned and logical mind to me, rather than somebody trying to avoid stepping on any toes.

Modifié par terdferguson123, 22 septembre 2012 - 05:29 .

[Ryzaki]

Emzamination wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I don't know. Whatever his name was in Legacy looked like an abomination to me. A thinking one but still...

He is one of the first darkspawn directly cursed by the maker.

And he used to be a magister. The fact that he reached the golden city at all was a feat worthy of gods

Plus there's no proof the "maker" cursed him. According to him the city was black when he got there. Maybe something was locked up there and it wasn't punishment at all but rather whatever it was being unleashed.

I bet he regrets existing every time he looks at that monstrocity he calls a face I would anyway

I would too. That and he's now a immortal, stuck in some weird tower and probably reeks.

[IanPolaris]

Vandicus wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

I disagree that there is no laundry list of powers that makes a being a deity. There is a common industry practice regarding what constitutes a deity in fantasy settings. That is the standard which Thedas uses. 

Care to prove that?  As far as I know the idea of divinity in Thedas is very much like the one in our real world, and the maker and the elven gods (which are labeled clearly as divinities to their followers) handled deliberately in a way to have their existance be unknown in the game.  That is DIFFERENT from most fantasy settings.

Just because bobo the powerful can give a person powers does not make bobo a god at least in Thedas.  The old gods were once worshiped as gods but aren't regarded any longer as divinities.  Nevertheless,. they did have tremendous powers.  The Archdemons aren't considered divinities, but they DEFINATELY give their followers powers.

-Polaris

The "Maker" is actually fairly common. In most fantasy settings written in heavily Christian influenced cultures, there is an overgod whose existence is a matter of faith(although many at some point validate this by having the overdeity interact with the underdeities). This overdeity is always either the creator of everything, or a subordinate somewhere in a chain of command where at the top rests the creator of everything.

Likewise the elven gods represent a group of deities that are believed to have been once there. Dead or missing deities are another common element in fantasy settings.

In order to "prove" to you that the term deity has a pretty basic set of criteria that determines whether or not a being is referred to as a deity in the meta perspective, I'll need a short list of what books or fantasy settings that you've read from that includes deities of the "definitely real and considered as such" variety.

The use of deity to refer to beings that meet certain requirements is a result of projection of our terminology into a fantasy setting. Much like the term magic, which covers anything supernatural, is still used in settings where everyone has access to and uses magic(magic couldn't possibly be any more natural, but its still referred to as magic).

No.   I am asking something very directly of you.  I want you to PROVE that the writers of Dragon Age had a laundry list of abilities that made some beings absolutely divine on their own crock and others not.  I note that many other fantasy worlds DO in fact have such author defined checklists.  If so, then yes, divinity is an absolute trait and if you have the attributes needed you are divine.

You have claimed this about Thedas but provided no proof of it.  That is what I am asking for.  Otherwise divinity is entirely a point of view.

-Polaris

[Ash Wind]

I'll throw in my two cents on the Morrigan/Atheists discussion.

My view is that what Morrigan believes, and what she presents to the world are her beliefs are sometimes different things. There's a line in the Anvil of the Void quest that, to me, contradicts the opinion she presents to Leliana in their Maker discussion.

If you are going to destroy the Anvil of the Void and Morrigan is present, she will protest:

Morrigan: Have you no desire to discover this anvil's potential? It is a marvel, a tool of creation!

Morrigan: You could rival the Maker Himself with this instrument.

Morrigan: If you destroy the Anvil, I swear to will regret it.

Is it definitive? No, not by any means, but by the same token, it doesn't sound like the devout atheist she presents in the discussion with Leliana.

I don't know if there are many atheists who think the way to get their point across is to invoke a reference to the powers of a God they don't believe exists.

Modifié par Ash Wind, 22 septembre 2012 - 05:32 .

[Realmzmaster]

Ryzaki wrote...

I don't know. Whatever his name was in Legacy looked like an abomination to me. A thinking one but still...

Corypheus is a Tevinter magister who worshipped the old god Dumat. Some of his ramblings lead Hawke and others to conclude that he was one of the magisters who entered the Golden City and became one of the first darkspawn. He is not an abomination.

[Xilizhra]

It's a figure of speech, nothing more. How many atheists say "Go to hell?"

[Vandicus]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



Again, she clearly states that she doesn't believe in any sort of higher power, and her words do not even suggest this talk of "implicity stating 'then me'.

Whether Morrigan's right or wrong in her beliefs regarding the Maker's presence -- or the presence of any gods aside from the Old Gods -- is irrelevant. What matters is that in her dialogue with Leliana as well as dialogue in other places she clearly leaves no room to assume she's anything other then an atheist.

Any statement that one does not recognize any higher power means one does not recognize any power higher than oneself. A higher power is one that has more authority/power than the individual in question. Stating that one recognizes no higher power is an inherent act of egoism. It does not exclude the possibility of gods existing, though in real life unless one believes oneself to be a god it almost always means they do not believes in gods. 

[Emzamination]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

<Snip>

So she lies to the man she shares a bed with but suddenly morrigan and the bard girl are bffl and totally honest with each other? You're making the same Mistake as Lobsel redux and taking it at face value. Keep in mind Morrigan's character is a cunning manipulative, thoroughly deceitful liar which she and her mother boast of with pride.

Modifié par Emzamination, 22 septembre 2012 - 05:34 .

[IanPolaris]

Ash Wind, in our real world, Atheists will often invoke "god" as part of an expression, but that doesn't mean they actually believe in any divinity. Calling on the "Maker" in thedas seems to be a common part of the language and I think you are reading too much into that one line especially when Morrigan quite plainly and clearly takes a very doctrinaire atheist position not once but multiple times elsewhere.

-Polaris

[terdferguson123]

IanPolaris wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Your own definition of agnosticism backs me up. Agnostics claim that divinity is UNKNOWABLE. That's a definate and positive claim.

-Polaris

No it doesn't reread it. You missed the (as Far as can be judged) parantheses. Which is exactly what I stated, current knowledge does not provide enough evidence but it could in the future.

It's a paranthetical expression which means it isn't part of the definition (or else it wouldn't be parenthetical).  I missed nothing of the sort.

-Polaris

parenthetical expression - an expression in parentheses; "his writing was full of parentheticals"parentheticaladjunct
- a construction that can be used to extend the meaning of a word or
phrase but is not one of the main constituents of a sentence 






So, we should just ignore attempts to clarify the meaning of a term? Just becuase it isn't part of the main train of thought doesn't mean it isn't crucial to understanding. If it wasn't it wouldn't be there.

Modifié par terdferguson123, 22 septembre 2012 - 05:36 .

[IanPolaris]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I don't know. Whatever his name was in Legacy looked like an abomination to me. A thinking one but still...

Corypheus is a Tevinter magister who worshipped the old god Dumat. Some of his ramblings lead Hawke and others to conclude that he was one of the magisters who entered the Golden City and became one of the first darkspawn. He is not an abomination.

I agree with most of this, but it doesn't mean he can't be an abomination as well.  Not all abominations are totally controlled by the demon within.

-Polaris

[Emzamination]

Filament wrote...

A world where I agree with IanPolaris and LobselVith is a world I don't want to live in anymore. *cuts*

*Phew* Glad I wasn't mentioned as well

[Ryzaki]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I don't know. Whatever his name was in Legacy looked like an abomination to me. A thinking one but still...

Corypheus is a Tevinter magister who worshipped the old god Dumat. Some of his ramblings lead Hawke and others to conclude that he was one of the magisters who entered the Golden City and became one of the first darkspawn. He is not an abomination.

Thus the usage of the word "looked". I know he was a magister corrupted by the darkspawn taint. Yeesh.

[IanPolaris]

terdferguson123 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Your own definition of agnosticism backs me up. Agnostics claim that divinity is UNKNOWABLE. That's a definate and positive claim.

-Polaris

No it doesn't reread it. You missed the (as Far as can be judged) parantheses. Which is exactly what I stated, current knowledge does not provide enough evidence but it could in the future.

It's a paranthetical expression which means it isn't part of the definition (or else it wouldn't be parenthetical).  I missed nothing of the sort.

-Polaris

parenthetical expression - an expression in parentheses; "his writing was full of parentheticals"parentheticaladjunct
- a construction that can be used to extend the meaning of a word or
phrase but is not one of the main constituents of a sentence 






So, we should just ignore attempts to clarify the meaning of a term? Just becuase it isn't part of the main train of thought doesn't mean it isn't crucial to understanding. If it wasn't it wouldn't be there.

You are attempting to use the parenthetical expression to CHANGE what was said not clarify it.  What I said was true.  Agnostics deny that divinity is knowable and they deny it as a positive claim.

-Polaris

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Emzamination wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

No one is questioning that the old gods are real. It's pretty clear that they are. That doesn't make them divinities. Certainly most of the people of modern thedas do NOT regard them as divine beings (but do admit...those that know of them....that they are immensely powerful and immortal).

-Polaris

The dark spawn are the result of the tevinter magisters being cursed by the maker upon entering the black city <Link>.

Darkspawn are compelled to constantly seek out the tevinter magister's old gods <Link>

These gods are the only beings who can control the Dark spawn.

They are Divine

Oh yea tots forgot about that. I remember being really disappointed about the origin of the darkspawn:?. I was hoping there would be developments there. But maybe that's just folklore, maybe pollution created the darkspawn.

Have we seen any atheists so far? Did someone say Morrigan was? I can't remember.
It'd be a revelation if the player was the first atheist in the world. You'd go on a quest to discover there was no god, then the ending could be like "You guuuuise! You can stop sticking each other, you're all equally wrong!" and they all chase you instead *cue benny hill*

[Xilizhra]

Is there any chance we can yank this around to the possibility of the PC being atheist, or at least of a religion that isn't Andrastian?

[Ryzaki]

Emzamination wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

<Snip>

So she lies to the man she shares a bed with but suddenly morrigan and the bard girl are bffl and totally honest with each other? You're making the same Mistake as Lobsel redux and taking it at face value. Keep in mind Morrigan's character is a cunning manipulative, thoroughly deceitful liar which she and her mother boast of with pride.

Tell me something. What exactly does Morrigan have to gain from lying about that? Every other lie? A advantage (mostly manipulation). What does she have to gain from telling Leliana she's a complete nonbeliever in any religion or gods/goddesses rather than whatever religion you think she follows? 

[TEWR]

Grizzly46 wrote...

So yes, religion should be present, and atheism should not be allowed more than boning children.

I'm willing to bet that atheists did exist during our time. To repost what I said a few months ago...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Atheists as we know the term today probably existed in the Middle Ages. You don't need to profess you're an atheist to actually be an atheist. But that's a matter I am admittedly ignorant of, and it's not like I can question the souls of men and women that have long since been dead, now can I?

Medieval Islam recognized the idea of being an atheist, though they tended to refer to them as simply heretics or non-believers, rather then people of a different belief.

Nevertheless, I'd say that while definitions differed, the fact that they would accuse anyone who didn't believe in their religion -- and since we can't question them, the possibility exists that some people did refuse the belief in any higher power.

One should note that philosophical atheism existed as early as the 5th and 6th centuries. And atheism itself as we're all no doubt aware draws its name from a Greek word that means "godless, denying the gods, ungodly". So one could argue on those grounds alone that there were people that did refute the notion of any sort of higher power.

Again, I'm not savvy on real world history in great detail -- and considering I went to a high school that tried to condense 5000 years of history in 9 months for my freshman year, that's understandable and lamentable really -- so I'm almost certainly missing a lot of history or getting a lot wrong here.

But atheism has probably always existed even in minute examples, even if it's only recently been accepted and defined. I think it would be foolish to say it never has existed. Ancient playwrights toyed with the idea of that belief, writing characters that displayed such a refusal in gods or deities of any sort (Euripedes and Aristophanes).

So I think we should be allowed to express atheism, or at most have lines spoken that can be taken either way. Perhaps Hawke's was meant to be that. I'd like to think so. But the paraphrase could've been clearer on that front, on whether it was an actual belief or a hopeful belief.

Another poster said in response to me -- to continue the discussion, though at the time I had forgotten about the thread -- that if you did proclaim yourself an atheist, you were effectively making yourself an outcast.

Which is actually something I'd enjoy seeing in DA3. If I can express such doubts to people that aren't my ragtag bunch of misfits, maybe I should receive the cold shoulder from them.

[Vandicus]

IanPolaris wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

I disagree that there is no laundry list of powers that makes a being a deity. There is a common industry practice regarding what constitutes a deity in fantasy settings. That is the standard which Thedas uses. 

Care to prove that?  As far as I know the idea of divinity in Thedas is very much like the one in our real world, and the maker and the elven gods (which are labeled clearly as divinities to their followers) handled deliberately in a way to have their existance be unknown in the game.  That is DIFFERENT from most fantasy settings.

Just because bobo the powerful can give a person powers does not make bobo a god at least in Thedas.  The old gods were once worshiped as gods but aren't regarded any longer as divinities.  Nevertheless,. they did have tremendous powers.  The Archdemons aren't considered divinities, but they DEFINATELY give their followers powers.

-Polaris

The "Maker" is actually fairly common. In most fantasy settings written in heavily Christian influenced cultures, there is an overgod whose existence is a matter of faith(although many at some point validate this by having the overdeity interact with the underdeities). This overdeity is always either the creator of everything, or a subordinate somewhere in a chain of command where at the top rests the creator of everything.

Likewise the elven gods represent a group of deities that are believed to have been once there. Dead or missing deities are another common element in fantasy settings.

In order to "prove" to you that the term deity has a pretty basic set of criteria that determines whether or not a being is referred to as a deity in the meta perspective, I'll need a short list of what books or fantasy settings that you've read from that includes deities of the "definitely real and considered as such" variety.

The use of deity to refer to beings that meet certain requirements is a result of projection of our terminology into a fantasy setting. Much like the term magic, which covers anything supernatural, is still used in settings where everyone has access to and uses magic(magic couldn't possibly be any more natural, but its still referred to as magic).

No.   I am asking something very directly of you.  I want you to PROVE that the writers of Dragon Age had a laundry list of abilities that made some beings absolutely divine on their own crock and others not.  I note that many other fantasy worlds DO in fact have such author defined checklists.  If so, then yes, divinity is an absolute trait and if you have the attributes needed you are divine.

You have claimed this about Thedas but provided no proof of it.  That is what I am asking for.  Otherwise divinity is entirely a point of view.

-Polaris

There is a "common industry practice". I maintain that the writers use it. Given DGs statements that no atheists exist in Thedas, the logical conclusion is that the meta terminology of deities applies to the existence of atheists in Thedas. I cannot provide you with absolute proof that the writers separate what constitutes a deity or not with a certain group of traits, but their statements indicate that they're following the norms. Would it be inappropriate to say that DA:O's plot used elements of the Hero's Journey? I cannot provide conclusive proof that the writers knowingly used this, but such an assumption is both logical and warranted.

[LobselVith8]

Vandicus wrote...

Andrastians have their own religious beliefs(which of course include denying the divinity of any other religion). They are not atheists. The codex entry with the scholars that you referenced and which I quoted states "Scholars assume the Old Gods must have indeed been real at one point". That means they think the Old Gods are no longer real. Clearly the scholars couldn't be any more wrong.

Morrigan, presumably does not deny the existence of these gods since they are known to her. 

That doesn't mean she worships them as deities or gods; some Andrastian believe (and even know) the Old Gods exist, but that doesn't make them gods in a literal sense. If Morrigan says she doesn't believe in the Maker or a higher power, why are you trying to dismiss her atheist view by saying no one can be atheist because of the Old Gods? It simply doesn't ring true that being immortal and having power makes them literal gods.

[IanPolaris]

Xilizhra wrote...

Is there any chance we can yank this around to the possibility of the PC being atheist, or at least of a religion that isn't Andrastian?

 
i'd love to but apparently according to a lot of poeple here it's impossible to be an atheist in Thedas which would have been a huge suprise to my HN Warden rogue who was very definately a hard-core atheist...and the dialog supported this.

-Polaris