1082 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Logic isn't math, and trying to reduce it to such can easily steer you wrong. Thank you for providing a perfect example.

Actually Math is codified logic.

-Polaris

The fact remains that they are not equivalent. That's not all logic is: there's also informal fallacies, one of which you presented perfectly. You deliberately provided an argument nobody would accept, knowing it was harder to defend, and tried to pretend you were using his logic. The argument you provide is also illogical on its own merits, since no definition of safety more than 5% of people will accept requires you to let someone kill you.

That's precisely the definition of "safety" that mages were expected to accept under Chantry rule, though.

[IanPolaris]

Meatbaggins wrote...

There may be examples of individual templars that are heroic, but if you think the Templars as an institution are portrayed in an overly good light, I think that's just your own bias speaking.

I didn't say the Templars as an institution were protrayed in a good light at all.  I was pointing out that the evil actions of insane blood mages were constantly paraded in front of the player, while we only heard about Templar abuses second hand.

That's stacking the deck.

-Polaris

[The Hierophant]

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Yes. But there is no magic in this world at all. Dragon ages universe does have magic, witches, wizards, maleficarum, all those people have magic. It would only be logical to assume that because of this, titles from our own cultures who have traditionally been believed to have magic powers, such as shaman, would have them in the dragon age universe.

The key word in all that is "assume". 

-Polaris

The codex states that the shamans believe that they learned their magic from the Witches of The Wilds. It would be a huge assumption to think that the Shamans are not magical.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 31 mai 2013 - 12:06 .

[garrusfan1]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

As long as the Qun is portrayed as the ones who will conquer both, I'm all good.

I'm down with the Qun if they handle the mages properly.

Advanced technology, leaves nothing to waste, protects it's people from mages, selective breeding. What's not to like?

Sex when and with who you're told to, not when and with who you want. The job you are told to do, regardless of whether or not you enjoy it. Being required to accept this based on flawed analogies that even a basic logic class would require you to throw out.

send people that don't agree with you to be (re educated). basically brain washing your own people. yep they sound like a great people

[Il Divo]

The Hierophant wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Yes. But there is no magic in this world at all. Dragon ages universe does have magic, witches, wizards, maleficarum, all those people have magic. It would only be logical to assume that because of this, titles from our own cultures who have traditionally been believed to have magic powers, such as shaman, would have them in the dragon age universe.

The key word in all that is "assume". 

-Polaris

The codex states that the shamans believe that they learned their magic from the Witches of The Wilds. It would be a huge assumption to think  that the Shamans are not magical.

Today, the Chasind are considered largely peaceful, though their ways are still primitive compared to our own. In the Korcari Wilds they live in strange-looking huts built on stilts or even built into the great treetops. They paint their faces and are split into small tribes ruled by shamans like those amongst the Avvars. There are many tales of these shamans having learned their magic from the "Witches of the Wilds," witches that inspire as much terror as they do awe and gratitude even if there is no definitive proof they exist. In particular, the tale of Flemeth, the greatest witch of the wilds, is celebrated amongst all tribes.

Just to highlight the important bit.

[IanPolaris]

Plaintiff wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Logic isn't math, and trying to reduce it to such can easily steer you wrong. Thank you for providing a perfect example.

Actually Math is codified logic.

-Polaris

The fact remains that they are not equivalent. That's not all logic is: there's also informal fallacies, one of which you presented perfectly. You deliberately provided an argument nobody would accept, knowing it was harder to defend, and tried to pretend you were using his logic. The argument you provide is also illogical on its own merits, since no definition of safety more than 5% of people will accept requires you to let someone kill you.

That's precisely the definition of "safety" that mages were expected to accept under Chantry rule, though.

Indeed and that was precisely my point.  If you accept the notion that it's acceptable to [insert terrible thing here] because of what somone might do, then no one is safe.

-Polaris

[Meatbaggins]

IanPolaris wrote...

Meatbaggins wrote...

There may be examples of individual templars that are heroic, but if you think the Templars as an institution are portrayed in an overly good light, I think that's just your own bias speaking.

I didn't say the Templars as an institution were protrayed in a good light at all.  I was pointing out that the evil actions of insane blood mages were constantly paraded in front of the player, while we only heard about Templar abuses second hand.

That's stacking the deck.

-Polaris

My comment was directed at the OP.

Modifié par Meatbaggins, 31 mai 2013 - 12:00 .

[In Exile]

IanPolaris wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...
If a society's system of checks and balances consists of leave or murder, then that is not a system of checks and balances. 

Sure it is. If enough people disagree with you, you can't survive alone.  The Dalish are painfully well aware of this.  The Keeper may be the most important person in a Dalish Tribe, but his or her power is far from absolute.

Then apparently the Circle system has totally adequate checks and balancs, because the mages could just murder the templars and leave, which is what they did. See? The system works!

Modifié par In Exile, 30 mai 2013 - 11:58 .

[IanPolaris]

Il Divo wrote...

Today, the Chasind are considered largely peaceful, though their ways are still primitive compared to our own. In the Korcari Wilds they live in strange-looking huts built on stilts or even built into the great treetops. They paint their faces and are split into small tribes ruled by shamans like those amongst the Avvars. There are many tales of these shamans having learned their magic from the "Witches of the Wilds," witches that inspire as much terror as they do awe and gratitude even if there is no definitive proof they exist. In particular, the tale of Flemeth, the greatest witch of the wilds, is celebrated amongst all tribes.

Just to highlight the important bit.

Which does not prove that all Shamans are mages, only that Shamanic Chasind mages exist.

-Polaris

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

IanPolaris wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

You might think it is wrong to keep a minority of people locked away (in various conditions) to safeguard a majority, and maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. But not because it must somehow also lead to the insane postion that killing everyone in the world is desirable.

Actually it is perfectly logical in a very cold way.  Let's say you have a population with subgroups A,B,C,D,and E all of which are minorities.  If one can justify (and it's easy to justify many things) that A deserves to be 'eliminated' for the safety of the rest, then sometime later, group B can also be targeted and eliminated, and down the line.  Eventually no one is left.

This is why it is unethical to use this rational to lock away/exterminate any group because of what they are rather than what they've done.

-Polaris

A: That's not what you were arguing a second ago.
B: Nobody worth listening to is arguing to eliminate mages, so  let's ignore that one.
C: As for locking them up, which is what this argument is really about, it can be justified if what they are makes them dangerous. I think the Chantry's Templars have proven they are not the people to do this, and it'll be difficult finding people who can, but the fact remains that while rare, abominations are dangerous. Thus, society is justified in trying to make it more likely that when someone turns, they turn in an isolated location while surrounded by Templars with Senior Enchanters in shouting distance. This is logical in a very cold way, assuming a logical rationale to lock that particular minority up at all.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 31 mai 2013 - 12:04 .

[Dave of Canada]

I'm really starting to hate that quote in which they admit they want overboard with insane mages, it's being used out-of-context to justify insane opinions. I can imagine it being used in DA3 when they show one mage go badly as "them not having learned their lesson".

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 31 mai 2013 - 12:01 .

[IanPolaris]

In Exile wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...
If a society's system of checks and balances consists of leave or murder, then that is not a system of checks and balances. 

Sure it is. If enough people disagree with you, you can't survive alone.  The Dalish are painfully well aware of this.  The Keeper may be the most important person in a Dalish Tribe, but his or her power is far from absolute.

Then apparently the Circle system has totally adequate checks and balancs, because the mages could just murder the templars and leave, which is what they did. See? The system works!

Nope.  Had the mages been permitted to leave the circles (at least as a whole), then we'd be talking about a very different sort of system, and the ethical arguments would be very different.

The difference is the Dalish CHOOSE to live in the system they have, and the Dalish are always free to walk away (and with very few exceptions free to return as well).  This is not so for mages in the circles.

-Polaris

[garrusfan1]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

You might think it is wrong to keep a minority of people locked away (in various conditions) to safeguard a majority, and maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. But not because it must somehow also lead to the insane postion that killing everyone in the world is desirable.

Actually it is perfectly logical in a very cold way.  Let's say you have a population with subgroups A,B,C,D,and E all of which are minorities.  If one can justify (and it's easy to justify many things) that A deserves to be 'eliminated' for the safety of the rest, then sometime later, group B can also be targeted and eliminated, and down the line.  Eventually no one is left.

This is why it is unethical to use this rational to lock away/exterminate any group because of what they are rather than what they've done.

-Polaris

A: That's not what you were arguing a second ago.
B: Nobody worth listening to is arguing to eliminate mages, so  let's ignore that one.
C: As for locking them up, which is what this argument is really about, it can be justified if what they are makes them dangerous. I think the Chantry and Templars have proven they are not the people to do this, and it'll be difficult finding people who can, but the fact remains that while rare, abominations are dangerous. Thus, society is justified in trying to make it more likely that when someone turns, they turn in an isolated location while surrounded by Templars with Senior Enchanters in shouting distance. This is logical in a very cold way, assuming a logical rationale to lock that particular minority up at all.

I think they should be given a piece of land and be left alone (no tevinter though)

[The Hierophant]

IanPolaris wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Today, the Chasind are considered largely peaceful, though their ways are still primitive compared to our own. In the Korcari Wilds they live in strange-looking huts built on stilts or even built into the great treetops. They paint their faces and are split into small tribes ruled by shamans like those amongst the Avvars. There are many tales of these shamans having learned their magic from the "Witches of the Wilds," witches that inspire as much terror as they do awe and gratitude even if there is no definitive proof they exist. In particular, the tale of Flemeth, the greatest witch of the wilds, is celebrated amongst all tribes.

Just to highlight the important bit.

Which does not prove that all Shamans are mages, only that Shamanic Chasind mages exist.

-Polaris

Why would the Chasind regard people who can't use magic as shamans, how are they going to commune with the spirits or use magic to heal ailments?

Modifié par The Hierophant, 31 mai 2013 - 12:04 .

[IanPolaris]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

C: As for locking them up, which is what this argument is really about, it can be justified if what they are makes them dangerous. I think the Chantry and Templars have proven they are not the people to do this, and it'll be difficult finding people who can, but the fact remains that while rare, abominations are dangerous. Thus, society is justified in trying to make it more likely that when someone turns, they turn in an isolated location while surrounded by Templars with Senior Enchanters in shouting distance. This is logical in a very cold way, assuming a logical rationale to lock that particular minority up at all.

It's only justifiable if:

1.  The solution actually WORKS (something the Chantry and Templars have never shown).  If confining mages actually generates more abominations than it quanantines, then it's a failure.

2.  There isn't another viable solution that does not involve denying a group of people basic human rights for what they are rather than what they've done.  This also hasn't been proven (heck it hasn't even been tried).

Now I am not saying that all mages should run free and do what they like.  I agree that magical education should be mandatory and magic should be strongly regulated.  I question that locking away all mages just because is appropriate or even the best solution.

Now, if a mage goes bad, then sure.  Lock the criminal away.  I'd even say that using magic to commit a crime aggravates it making harsher punishements necessary, but then you're judging people based on what they've done.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

The Hierophant wrote...

Why would the Chasind regard people who can't use magic as shamans, how are they going to commune with the spirits or use magic to heal ailments?

How do mediums and shamans commune with spirits in real life?  Unless you were a mage yourself, how could you tell?

-Polaris

[Plaintiff]

The Hierophant wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Today, the Chasind are considered largely peaceful, though their ways are still primitive compared to our own. In the Korcari Wilds they live in strange-looking huts built on stilts or even built into the great treetops. They paint their faces and are split into small tribes ruled by shamans like those amongst the Avvars. There are many tales of these shamans having learned their magic from the "Witches of the Wilds," witches that inspire as much terror as they do awe and gratitude even if there is no definitive proof they exist. In particular, the tale of Flemeth, the greatest witch of the wilds, is celebrated amongst all tribes.

Just to highlight the important bit.

Which does not prove that all Shamans are mages, only that Shamanic Chasind mages exist.

-Polaris

Why would the Chasind regard people who can't use magic as shamans, how are they going to commune with the spirits or use magic to heal ailments?

Isabela's completely mundane mother used to successfully pass herself off as a Rivaini seer often enough.

The Chasind may have a different perception of "magic" from the more "civilized" parts of Thedas, the same way that a culture with no education in modern medecine might think epileptic fits are a sign of demonic possession.

[Lt_Riley]

Meatbaggins wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Meatbaggins wrote...

There may be examples of individual templars that are heroic, but if you think the Templars as an institution are portrayed in an overly good light, I think that's just your own bias speaking.

I didn't say the Templars as an institution were protrayed in a good light at all.  I was pointing out that the evil actions of insane blood mages were constantly paraded in front of the player, while we only heard about Templar abuses second hand.

That's stacking the deck.

-Polaris

My comment was directed at the OP.

I'm going to have to go with Ians response as well. I was giving a perceptive view of the templars that have been seen in the media given us. It's impossible to judge the entirety of templars as there are different factions and subsets, such as the black imperial chantry templars, white chantry templars, seekers, the rogue schism, ect.

[The Hierophant]

Plaintiff wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Today, the Chasind are considered largely peaceful, though their ways are still primitive compared to our own. In the Korcari Wilds they live in strange-looking huts built on stilts or even built into the great treetops. They paint their faces and are split into small tribes ruled by shamans like those amongst the Avvars. There are many tales of these shamans having learned their magic from the "Witches of the Wilds," witches that inspire as much terror as they do awe and gratitude even if there is no definitive proof they exist. In particular, the tale of Flemeth, the greatest witch of the wilds, is celebrated amongst all tribes.

Just to highlight the important bit.

Which does not prove that all Shamans are mages, only that Shamanic Chasind mages exist.

-Polaris

Why would the Chasind regard people who can't use magic as shamans, how are they going to commune with the spirits or use magic to heal ailments?

Isabela's completely mundane mother used to successfully pass herself off as a Rivaini seer often enough.

The Chasind may have a different perception of "magic" from the more "civilized" parts of Thedas, the same way that a culture with no education in modern medecine might think epileptic fits are a sign of demonic possession.

Good points.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Lt_Riley wrote...

Meatbaggins wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Meatbaggins wrote...

There may be examples of individual templars that are heroic, but if you think the Templars as an institution are portrayed in an overly good light, I think that's just your own bias speaking.

I didn't say the Templars as an institution were protrayed in a good light at all.  I was pointing out that the evil actions of insane blood mages were constantly paraded in front of the player, while we only heard about Templar abuses second hand.

That's stacking the deck.

-Polaris

My comment was directed at the OP.

I'm going to have to go with Ians response as well. I was giving a perceptive view of the templars that have been seen in the media given us. It's impossible to judge the entirety of templars as there are different factions and subsets, such as the black imperial chantry templars, white chantry templars, seekers, the rogue schism, ect.

What about Otto Alrik? Or  Ser Varnell?

[Lt_Riley]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Lt_Riley wrote...

Meatbaggins wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Meatbaggins wrote...

There may be examples of individual templars that are heroic, but if you think the Templars as an institution are portrayed in an overly good light, I think that's just your own bias speaking.

I didn't say the Templars as an institution were protrayed in a good light at all.  I was pointing out that the evil actions of insane blood mages were constantly paraded in front of the player, while we only heard about Templar abuses second hand.

That's stacking the deck.

-Polaris

My comment was directed at the OP.

I'm going to have to go with Ians response as well. I was giving a perceptive view of the templars that have been seen in the media given us. It's impossible to judge the entirety of templars as there are different factions and subsets, such as the black imperial chantry templars, white chantry templars, seekers, the rogue schism, ect.

What about Otto Alrik? Or  Ser Varnell?

By end game Alriks suggestion was more than justified and varnell never gave any inclination of his views on the mages. He was more or less a radical thug opposing the qunari.

[Plaintiff]

No matter how bad mages get, I can't imagine that "turn them all into living realdolls for my personal pleasure" could ever be 'justified'.

[KiwiQuiche]

IanPolaris wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

If the villain of the comic had not been a mage, then he wouldn't have been able to bring so much chaos, that's the point. That's why mages can't be treated as normal people and they need to be imprisoned in the Circle, it's just too much the risk of let them to live free.

Why not kill everyone then? Then the entire world will be safe.

-Polaris

Indeed, the answer is simple. We kill, we kill EVERYONE. Marvelous.


On a more serious note, a lot of people seem to not remember that Templars are actual drug-addicts. That is not a good attriubte to give heavily armed guards who have absolute control over a bunch of people.

[Lt_Riley]

Plaintiff wrote...

No matter how bad mages get, I can't imagine that "turn them all into living realdolls for my personal pleasure" could ever be 'justified'.

They summoned pride demons at the docks while innocent people scurried about. That most definitely justifies tranquility if not execution.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

IanPolaris wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

C: As for locking them up, which is what this argument is really about, it can be justified if what they are makes them dangerous. I think the Chantry and Templars have proven they are not the people to do this, and it'll be difficult finding people who can, but the fact remains that while rare, abominations are dangerous. Thus, society is justified in trying to make it more likely that when someone turns, they turn in an isolated location while surrounded by Templars with Senior Enchanters in shouting distance. This is logical in a very cold way, assuming a logical rationale to lock that particular minority up at all.

It's only justifiable if:

1.  The solution actually WORKS (something the Chantry and Templars have never shown).  If confining mages actually generates more abominations than it quanantines, then it's a failure.

2.  There isn't another viable solution that does not involve denying a group of people basic human rights for what they are rather than what they've done.  This also hasn't been proven (heck it hasn't even been tried).

Now I am not saying that all mages should run free and do what they like.  I agree that magical education should be mandatory and magic should be strongly regulated.  I question that locking away all mages just because is appropriate or even the best solution.

Now, if a mage goes bad, then sure.  Lock the criminal away.  I'd even say that using magic to commit a crime aggravates it making harsher punishements necessary, but then you're judging people based on what they've done.

-Polaris

What you're missing is that the quarantined abominations are less of a threat than nonquarantined. When Meredith's sister snapped, she rampaged through a city killing 70 people. According to the Codex, others have taken out whole cities. Heck, we see the danger of magic in Connor, Uldred, and the Baroness. Which of those abominations was halted the easiest? The one trapped in with other mages by the Templars.

As for your acutal argument, if statistical evidence can be cited that this does not make Thedas safer (despite the fact that it really ought to) I'll agree the system will need to be revisited, possibly thrown out. (I agree that the Chantry ought to be able to provide this evidence, but they probably never will.) Unless that happens, I believe that quanrantining abominations is probably the sanest thing anyone in Thedas has ever done.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 31 mai 2013 - 12:31 .