307 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

I stop for a few hours to actually do work and see what happens?

The absolutely inevitable if you start a thread about religion?

[Dave of Canada]

And Meredith's opinion was influenced by the fact that her apostate sister slaughtered her entire family and a bunch of people form her village, nor does she represent the majority opinion of the Chantry. The fact that she allowed blood mages to return to the Circle--despite the no-tolerance policy--shows she's not as bad as portrayed.

[Nerevar-as]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I stop for a few hours to actually do work and see what happens?


Seriously guys - last warning. Any quotes of actual religious material or comparisons to real life religion is going to be reported.

Talk about the religions of Thedas all you want - do NOT bring actual real life theology into this.

That´s I just can´t understand. They obviously take elements and inspiration from RL issues that we aren´t then allowed to discuss here. Even considering the inflamatory potential of something such as religion, using RL examples that likely inspired the game isn´t allowed? It´s a bit like throwing a stone and then hiding the hand (no idea the english equivalent expression).

[The Hierophant]

Youth4Ever wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Not really, Mages are treated rather well by society all things considering.

KC Meredith refers to magic a curse. "I have sympathy for mages, they suffer a terrible curse..." But its not a curse. Its a gift. And viewing it as a curse skews her view of mages.

Actually it's not a gift more like a responsibility, when you take into account Fade tearing, demonic summoning, and possession. 

[Plaintiff]

Youth4Ever wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Not really, Mages are treated rather well by society all things considering.

KC Meredith refers to magic a curse. "I have sympathy for mages, they suffer a terrible curse..." But its not a curse. Its a gift. And viewing it as a curse skews her view of mages.

I'd say that how mages are treated in their captivity is irrelevent. 

If someone obtains a young macaque monkey from poachers that likely stole it from its parents, then it doesn't matter if they keep the monkey in a cage and throw rocks at it for fun, or if they dress the monkey up in adorable little coats and take it to IKEA. The act of owning the monkey is wrong regardless.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 22 février 2013 - 10:29 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Xilizhra wrote...

I stop for a few hours to actually do work and see what happens?

The absolutely inevitable if you start a thread about religion?

Fair enough, but the key word in the thread title was LORE. As in story. Narrative. Fiction. Completely separate from theology and beliefs in the land of non-fiction. 

I'll request that my own thread be locked rather than see it turned into a real-life religious fight. 

[Xilizhra]

And Meredith's opinion was influenced by the fact that her apostate sister slaughtered her entire family and a bunch of people form her village, nor does she represent the majority opinion of the Chantry. The fact that she allowed blood mages to return to the Circle--despite the no-tolerance policy--shows she's not as bad as portrayed.

Meredith may not be evil per se, due to being mentally ill. She is, however, frequently utterly fiendish (albeit inconsistently so, as she wavers from recapturing blood mages to outright murdering people who are only family members of mages) in her enforcement policies.

[Pasquale1234]

Plaintiff wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

And for your second statement, I disagree. If it meant that, they would have said that. They didn't.

If what they meant was that "magic sometimes leads to sin, but also doesn't a lot of the time" then they would've said that.

What they don't say is just as important as what they do say and what they don't say, at any point, is that magic can easily be used for good or even simply be a neutral force. These possibilities are never acknowledged by the Chantry, at least not in any material we've seen in-game.

For she has said to us, “Magic
exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.” Therefore, I say to
you, they who work magic which dominates the minds and hearts of others,
they have transgressed the Maker’s law.
-The Sermons of Justinia I

[Dave of Canada]

Xilizhra wrote...

I stop for a few hours to actually do work and see what happens?

The absolutely inevitable if you start a thread about religion?

Only if people intend to bring it up rather than argue with lore.

[lil yonce]

Xilizhra wrote...

They can, with ease: simply alter the minds of the evil people. If that's impossible for some reason, give reasons for them to change their own minds, and do it directly and without hesitation.

Free Will would no longer exist in the first situation and in the second situation changing their minds or giving reasons for not doing evil things doesn't mean you've changed their hearts.

I suppose we should stop. I don't want to be reported.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 22 février 2013 - 10:58 .

[TEWR]

Weep for Dalmasca this thread, for she is lost!

[Plaintiff]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

And for your second statement, I disagree. If it meant that, they would have said that. They didn't.

If what they meant was that "magic sometimes leads to sin, but also doesn't a lot of the time" then they would've said that.

What they don't say is just as important as what they do say and what they don't say, at any point, is that magic can easily be used for good or even simply be a neutral force. These possibilities are never acknowledged by the Chantry, at least not in any material we've seen in-game.

For she has said to us, “Magic
exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.” Therefore, I say to
you, they who work magic which dominates the minds and hearts of others,
they have transgressed the Maker’s law.
-The Sermons of Justinia I

What's your point here? All this does is specify a kind of magic that is bad. All the Chant of Light ever does is reinforce the negative aspects of magic, leaving the common, ignorant peasants to believe that that's all there is.

Show me a passage in the Chant of Light that specifies a type of magic that is acceptable, or acknowledges the ways in which magic can help people.

[Fast Jimmy]

Plaintiff wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Not really, Mages are treated rather well by society all things considering.

KC Meredith refers to magic a curse. "I have sympathy for mages, they suffer a terrible curse..." But its not a curse. Its a gift. And viewing it as a curse skews her view of mages.

I'd say that how mages are treated in their captivity is irrelevent. 

If someone obtains a young macaque monkey from poachers that likely stole it from its parents, then it doesn't matter if they keep the monkey in a cage and throw rocks at it for fun, or if they dress the monkey up in adorable little coats and take it to IKEA. The act of owning the monkey is wrong regardless.

What if the monkey's parents were killed in a terrible forest fire and, otherwise, the monkey would have died? Is that still wrong? Right and wrong are very slippery slopes to talk about... especially when talking about freedom and monkeys. 

[lil yonce]

Plaintiff wrote...

I'd say that how mages are treated in their captivity is irrelevent. 

If someone obtains a young macaque monkey from poachers that likely stole it from its parents, then it doesn't matter if they keep the monkey in a cage and throw rocks at it for fun, or if they dress the monkey up in adorable little coats and take it to IKEA. The act of owning the monkey is wrong regardless.

I don't believe in the Circle of Magi. I think it should be abolished. Not through the Mage-Templar War, but I do think it should be done away with. I just wanted to give an example of general Chantry/Templar sentiment towards magic and mages that is absolutely contradictory to their holy scripture.

[Fast Jimmy]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I stop for a few hours to actually do work and see what happens?


Seriously guys - last warning. Any quotes of actual religious material or comparisons to real life religion is going to be reported.

Talk about the religions of Thedas all you want - do NOT bring actual real life theology into this.

That´s I just can´t understand. They obviously take elements and inspiration from RL issues that we aren´t then allowed to discuss here. Even considering the inflamatory potential of something such as religion, using RL examples that likely inspired the game isn´t allowed? It´s a bit like throwing a stone and then hiding the hand (no idea the english equivalent expression).

We've managed to have pretty interesting conversations for about five pages without it coming up to much. Lets just keep it that way. 

[TEWR]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Not really, Mages are treated rather well by society all things considering.

KC Meredith refers to magic a curse. "I have sympathy for mages, they suffer a terrible curse..." But its not a curse. Its a gift. And viewing it as a curse skews her view of mages.

I'd say that how mages are treated in their captivity is irrelevent. 

If someone obtains a young macaque monkey from poachers that likely stole it from its parents, then it doesn't matter if they keep the monkey in a cage and throw rocks at it for fun, or if they dress the monkey up in adorable little coats and take it to IKEA. The act of owning the monkey is wrong regardless.

What if the monkey's parents were killed in a terrible forest fire and, otherwise, the monkey would have died? Is that still wrong? Right and wrong are very slippery slopes to talk about... especially when talking about freedom and monkeys. 

....

....I approve of this conversation.

[Xilizhra]

What if the monkey's parents were killed in a terrible forest fire and, otherwise, the monkey would have died? Is that still wrong? Right and wrong are very slippery slopes to talk about... especially when talking about freedom and monkeys.

Then it's a wrong action taken that coincidentally had good results. What should be done is that their natural habit be constructed as closely as possible and allow them to live in as natural a way as can be done, if they can't survive in the wild.

[Plaintiff]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Not really, Mages are treated rather well by society all things considering.

KC Meredith refers to magic a curse. "I have sympathy for mages, they suffer a terrible curse..." But its not a curse. Its a gift. And viewing it as a curse skews her view of mages.

I'd say that how mages are treated in their captivity is irrelevent. 

If someone obtains a young macaque monkey from poachers that likely stole it from its parents, then it doesn't matter if they keep the monkey in a cage and throw rocks at it for fun, or if they dress the monkey up in adorable little coats and take it to IKEA. The act of owning the monkey is wrong regardless.

What if the monkey's parents were killed in a terrible forest fire and, otherwise, the monkey would have died? Is that still wrong? Right and wrong are very slippery slopes to talk about... especially when talking about freedom and monkeys. 

If the monkey died due to unlucky circumstances, nobody would be at fault. If the person who "rescued" the monkey genuinely cared about its wellbeing, they would have taken it to an animal preserve or a zoo that can simulate its natural environment and give it the proper care it needs. Keeping it as their personal pet is a wrong action, regardless of how the monkey was obtained.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 22 février 2013 - 10:47 .

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

No, it's because of what the Maker's done. According to the Chantry, the Maker was responsible for creating the darkspawn... those beings that, in case you've forgotten, reproduce by gang-rape and bizarre mutiliations, and that doesn't even consider what happens when they go to war. For that alone, he should be called to account, and that's completely ignoring all the other crap that he as a supposedly omnipotent being has allowed to happen, without taking any steps to prevent it, because he's a spiteful, vindictive bastard.

The bolded/italicized is key. Take anything the Chantry claims with a grain of salt. We don't know anything about the Maker aside from what the Chantry teaches, and a lot of what they teach is based on what they interpret the Chant of Light to mean.

Which doesn't mean they're correct. Their use of "maleficar" to only refer to blood mages is a case in point, as maleficar is an old Tevinter word that simply means "one who is wicked". And thus, Templars like Alrik can appropriately be deemed maleficar.

[lil yonce]

Plaintiff wrote...

What's your point here? All this does is specify a kind of magic that is bad. All the Chant of Light  the Chantry ever does is reinforce the negative aspects of magic, leaving the common, ignorant peasants to believe that that's all there is.

I think its the Chantry and not the Chant of Light.

Show me a passage in the Chant of Light that specifies a type of magic that is acceptable, or acknowledges the ways in which magic can help people.

I think all magic truly used for the Maker's name is acceptable. Even blood magic, I would say. The Chant of Light never says magic of any kind is evil -- only that it can be used by the evil.

Andraste gave Shartan a blade -- Glandivlis -- which has the power to enslave enemies in a very blood magic type fashion. I don't think the Maker's bride would use blood magic if it were so terrible. Assuming one believes she is the Maker's bride.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 22 février 2013 - 10:54 .

[TEWR]

Plaintiff wrote...

If the monkey died due to unlucky circumstances, nobody would be at fault. If the person who "rescued" the monkey genuinely cared about its wellbeing, they would have taken it to an animal preserve or a zoo that can simulate its natural environment and give it the proper care it needs. Keeping it as their personal pet is a wrong action, regardless of how the monkey was obtained.

Justice, is that you?

[Plaintiff]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

No, it's because of what the Maker's done. According to the Chantry, the Maker was responsible for creating the darkspawn... those beings that, in case you've forgotten, reproduce by gang-rape and bizarre mutiliations, and that doesn't even consider what happens when they go to war. For that alone, he should be called to account, and that's completely ignoring all the other crap that he as a supposedly omnipotent being has allowed to happen, without taking any steps to prevent it, because he's a spiteful, vindictive bastard.

The bolded/italicized is key. Take anything the Chantry claims with a grain of salt. We don't know anything about the Maker aside from what the Chantry teaches, and a lot of what they teach is based on what they interpret the Chant of Light to mean.

Which doesn't mean they're correct. Their use of "maleficar" to only refer to blood mages is a case in point, as maleficar is an old Tevinter word that simply means "one who is wicked". And thus, Templars like Alrik can appropriately be deemed maleficar.

Well, what the maker is in reality is irrelevent. Xilizhra's point is that the maker as presented by the Chantry is a maker that does not deserve praise or worship, but should instead be condemned for the horrors he's inflicted on mankind.

Indeed, the Chant of Light reads like a romance novel that glorifies and romanticizes abusive relationships.

[Fast Jimmy]

If the monkey died due to unlucky circumstances, nobody would be at fault. If the person who "rescued" the monkey genuinely cared about its wellbeing, they would have taken it to an animal preserve or a zoo that can simulate its natural environment and give it the proper care it needs. Keeping it as their personal pet is a wrong action, regardless of how the monkey was obtained.

Then you are saying owning a pet is morally wrong. Because every pet imaginable is a direct descendent of a once wild breed.

...what am I doing?

Okay, let's get back on focus here... who wants to talk about the possibility that the Archdemons control of the Darkspawn may be a form of blood magic? That hearing "singing" may be analogous to what a subject who undergoes blood magic control feels? This can be possibly upheld by the experience Hawke has in DA2 where the prostitute puts him under blood magic and a quiet ringing is heard...?

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 22 février 2013 - 10:52 .

[Pasquale1234]

Plaintiff wrote...
What they don't say is just as important as what they do say and what they don't say, at any point, is that magic can easily be used for good or even simply be a neutral force. These possibilities are never acknowledged by the Chantry, at least not in any material we've seen in-game.

Pasquale1234 wrote...
For she has said to us, “Magic
exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.” Therefore, I say to
you, they who work magic which dominates the minds and hearts of others,
they have transgressed the Maker’s law.
-The Sermons of Justinia I

Plaintiff wrote...
What's your point here? All this does is specify a kind of magic that is bad. All the Chant of Light ever does is reinforce the negative aspects of magic, leaving the common, ignorant peasants to believe that that's all there is.

Show me a passage in the Chant of Light that specifies a type of magic that is acceptable, or acknowledges the ways in which magic can help people.

Magic exists to serve man.

I think that simple statement does acknowledge the idea that magic can be used for good, and is expected to be used for good or neutral purposes.

[TEWR]

Plaintiff wrote...

Well, what the maker is in reality is irrelevent. Xilizhra's point is that the maker as presented by the Chantry is a maker that does not deserve praise or worship, but should instead be condemned for the horrors he's inflicted on mankind.

Indeed, the Chant of Light reads like a romance novel that glorifies and romanticizes abusive relationships.

I'd argue it's entirely relevant. To condemn anyone, even a God, for what one perceives Him to be based on peoples' interpretations is not right. It's no different then condemning a Mage or an Elf simply because you perceive them as criminals for some action, but you don't know the reality of the situation and person in question.