WillPF363 wrote...
So if I understand you MrJB, you're saying that it's not Mages using their powers to forcibly take thrones and enslave people- rather that they will simply become the upper class because magic gives them an advantage? Which is why you're discounting other societies in Thedas that have less restrictions on Mages and still haven't gone the way of Tevinter? Like Rivain, or pre-Calenhad Ferelden. So what I'm getting from you is that (aside from the dangers of blood magic and demons) mages should be in circles because they have an unfair chance to be important in society.
That would be more or less it, yes.
Because that is a terrible argument. First, a free and fair society should not be based on the oppression of a certain group. And second, Thedas is not a free or fair society. Tevinter still has slavery, that's the obvious one sure. But Orlais still has serfdom and that's pretty much slavery-lite. They also still have nobles who can run rough-shod over the peasents with little to no consequences, and Chevaliers who can go around raping women whenever they feel like it. And Orlais is the Chantry's home base.
I do not claim that I support every other aspect of Thedosian societies but something like the rights of the nobles are things that only exist in the mind of the people and these beliefs can be eroded away with time. If the people of Thedas were to create guns, then even if an extensivelly trained chevalier came to rape some peasant girl, she could present a threat to him. God created men but Samuel Colt made them equal.
But magic has a real, objective value and it will always will. Magic is an advantage and like other any advantages, it will be used to raise one's position in the hierarchy of society. Things like industrialism could help diminish the gap between mages and non-mages but it will always exist in some form or the other.
So, to me, there seems to be two options. Either we allow mages to be free with the full knowledge that there is a very real chance than in some generations, they might be living in the palaces, writing laws, while non-mages have been relegated to the Alienages all in the name of freedom and justice; or we keep them away from society, lock them up in a luxurious towers where we will give them a comfortable life with acess to some privileges; such as an education; that the free peasantry doesn't even have general acess to yet?
To me, the answer seems clear.
I don't support the aristocracy or the monarchies. I just don't speak much about them because they are not often the subject of arguments. Even the games themselves haven't asked much whether this system is really necessary beyond the ocasional moment in Orzammar.
Mages can be dangerous, but the Chantry controls them for their own power and gain more than altruism. There should still be Cirlces, so that mages can learn to control their abilities- but they shouldn't be locked in there forever losing more and more freedoms with each passing year because some mage somewhere pulled an Anders. Safety is good, but you can never guarantee safety. You can do your best to hold to due process and innocense until proven guilty.
Which is not mutually exclusive with the Circle System.
You and I have our freedoms restricted in order for society to exist; it's the very point of the legal system, restrict freedom so we can co-exist. For instance, in my country, it's almost impossible to own a gun; the government can have as many they like. I am not forbidden from having a gun because I have given evidence of being dangerous, I haven't commited a crime in my life.
I am forbidden simply because the possibility exists that I will be dangerous if I am given a gun. Therefore, the simple possibility of me being dangerous has restricted my freedoms.
Given the fact that mages have the potential to be much more dangerous than normal people, it is only logical that the restrictions imposed upon their freedoms are stricter in order to reflect this.
A 9mm and a nuclear bomb serve the same purpose; kill; just like a mage and a non-mages are both human or elven. But you wouldn't argue that there is no difference between a 9mm and a nucle bomb and thatw e should treat both in the same manner, would you?
But that doesn't mean I don't think mages shouldn't be treated as innocent until proven guilty. For instance, after "Broken Circle", despite being Pro-Templar I believe the correct action to take is to increase security around the mages tortured by Uldred until we can be reasonably sure they are not possessed. Not kill them because the possibiltiy exists that they might.
Likewise, I spare the mages who surrender in "The Last Straw".
Also, regarding the Chantry, during the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden, the Chantry did not send templars or mages to assist Orlais despite it being the seat of the Chantry thus sticking by their goal of keeping mages politically neutral.
The only times the Chantry has used the mages were against the Dalish; who were killing every human in Orlais; the Qunari; who wish to convert everyone; Tevinter; who wishes to enslave everyone; and the Darkspawn; who wish to kill everyone. All of which were justified.
Even during the Fifth Blight, it ws the mages who argued for more of them being sent, while the templars opposed the idea out of fear.
I believe that all of this proves that the Chantry is honest in what it preaches; mages are dangerous, so we must keep them away from the general population; and are not using them to gain power or prestige.
Modifié par MisterJB, 25 avril 2013 - 05:43 .
Retour en haut
