160 réponses à ce sujet

[Jackums]

Narrow Margin wrote...

JackumsD wrote...

"Evil" is a subjective concept. In fact, I could entirely dismiss the idea of good and evil as a whole. They're human constructs just as are the notions of right and wrong.

As such, no, I don't think Tevinter are "evil". They practise slavery because they can and because it benefits them. They're simply utilising what's at their disposal. Do I find it cruel? Yes. Do I personally support it? No. Do I think it's evil? No.

That seems less an argument that they are not evil and more one that the term evil is meaningless. Which isn't the same thing.

I don't need to put forth an argument considering this thread is posing an entirely subjective question. There is no right or wrong answer because whether something is "evil" is a point of view. Therefore any debate would be a debate solely of opinion, with no basis of fact. "Evil" is a weightless concept to me, and as such, my answer is that, no, I don't find Tevinter "evil", because evil does not exist. It's a point of view. It's defined by the individual.

Modifié par JackumsD, 16 juin 2013 - 04:32 .

[iOnlySignIn]

"Evil" is just a fancy name to call things you strongly disagree with. So, no.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

JackumsD wrote...

Narrow Margin wrote...

JackumsD wrote...

"Evil" is a subjective concept. In fact, I could entirely dismiss the idea of good and evil as a whole. They're human constructs just as are the notions of right and wrong.

As such, no, I don't think Tevinter are "evil". They practise slavery because they can and because it benefits them. They're simply utilising what's at their disposal. Do I find it cruel? Yes. Do I personally support it? No. Do I think it's evil? No.

That seems less an argument that they are not evil and more one that the term evil is meaningless. Which isn't the same thing.

I don't need to put forth an argument considering this thread is posing an entirely subjective question. There is no right or wrong answer because whether something is "evil" is a point of view. Therefore any debate would be a debate solely of opinion, with no basis of fact. "Evil" is a weightless concept to me, and as such, my answer is that, no, I don't find Tevinter "evil", because evil does not exist. It's a point of view. It's defined by the individual.

The reason I don't accept such arguments is because they sound hollow in light of real life events like the Holocaust, and fictional events like... well, everything Tevinter does apart from opposing the Qunari. I'll grant that most matters are not black and white, but people like Caladrius and Danarius are. They really make that argument sound weak.

[Palidane]

Alright guys, I'm all for bashing relativists, but let's try not to get too off-topic here. I'm sure there is some forum rule we're breaking right now.

As to the OP, I think that is a meaningless question to ask. Tevinter has slaves and blood magic, that is its defining quality. If you take that away, all we're left with is a mageocracy that kills Qunari. It can be fun to entertain that notion, but it has no bearing on Tevinter. Slavery and blood magic can not just be swept aside as if they are inconsequential.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Tevinter enslaves mages and non-mages in their society, but it seems to be the only society where elves can be more than servants - as Fenris' sister had the opportunity to become a Magister as an elven mage. I'm sure that there's more to Tevinter than slavery and abusing blood magic for obscene acts or parlor tricks (as even Wynne sounded interested in visiting Tevinter with Shale), but there are some valid reasons that characters condemn their society.

That's not true. In the Circles, we've seen no evidence of anti-elven sentiment. Hell, in Kirkwall for all their faults they have Orsino - an elf- as First Enchanter and no one objects to his position based on race. 

Magic is quite obviously the great equalizer, and we don't know if non-mage elves are on the status hierarchy at all vs. non-mage humans. 

[In Exile]

[edited out, for the greater good]

Modifié par In Exile, 16 juin 2013 - 06:15 .

[Ieldra]

JackumsD wrote...

Narrow Margin wrote...

JackumsD wrote...

"Evil" is a subjective concept. In fact, I could entirely dismiss the idea of good and evil as a whole. They're human constructs just as are the notions of right and wrong.

As such, no, I don't think Tevinter are "evil". They practise slavery because they can and because it benefits them. They're simply utilising what's at their disposal. Do I find it cruel? Yes. Do I personally support it? No. Do I think it's evil? No.

That seems less an argument that they are not evil and more one that the term evil is meaningless. Which isn't the same thing.

I don't need to put forth an argument considering this thread is posing an entirely subjective question. There is no right or wrong answer because whether something is "evil" is a point of view. Therefore any debate would be a debate solely of opinion, with no basis of fact. "Evil" is a weightless concept to me, and as such, my answer is that, no, I don't find Tevinter "evil", because evil does not exist. It's a point of view. It's defined by the individual.

Well, no.

While I agree that "evil" is not an attribute of an action in an ontological sense - indeed nothing ever "is" evil but anything is "seen as evil by a human" - there are actions no sane human could call good or neutral. Killing people on a whim qualifies. So evil is not absolute, but it's not purely a matter of the individual either. The core of human morality is a species attribute.

Slavery is a borderline case. I have seen reasonable defenses of indentured servitude. Tevinter's version can be seen as an extreme case of "no regard for the destitute oer powerless", which is a stance adopted by existing cultures and seen as right. However, it is also a human tendency to use ideology to justify any atrocity, where people smother their own moral judgments under a layer of indoctrination. Somewhere in that mess lies a border beyond which I'd say actions must be declared evil from the viewpoint of any mentally and emotionally coherent member of the human species. Here's an example: we have an innate sense of empathy. We feel the suffering of others. I'd say it is appropriate for a human being to see the suffering of any human as undesirable. Causing suffering of other humans on a whim can reasonably seen as evil from any human viewpoint. It is an extreme case of course, but it illustrates that judgments of good or evil can be more than just opinions.

Having said that, in debates like this, I usually side with the relativists because I think that "good" or "evil" are not attributes but attributitions, and because too many absolutists use their absolutism to justify their own ideology. There is a large continuum of actions where good and evil is a matter of culture, and where judging another culture as evil is nothing but an attempt to justify expanding your own, often by force. There is also diversity among individuals of one culture. But we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater and say that all perception of good and evil is like that.

[Fredward]

Do ya'll think Tevinter could be considered a meritocracy? The only prerequisite being that you also have to be a mage to get somewhere. Which is unfair. But we've never heard about non slave mundanes in Tevinter. Maybe they get treated like everywhere else. I don't think running around and murdering all your citizens is a good model for government after all. And considering the entirety of Tevinter evil for the decisions of the elite is very jejune of ya'll.

But yeah I'd like Tevinter even more if it was a meritocracy.

[Dave of Canada]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Do ya'll think Tevinter could be considered a meritocracy? The only prerequisite being that you also have to be a mage to get somewhere. 

More like an oligarchy, only powerful mages have any say in anything. A mage without connections or influence means nothing, you're just as useful as some random slave and might as well be gutted to influence your superior's power.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 16 juin 2013 - 07:10 .

[Dave of Canada]

StreetMagic wrote...

Low level Tevinter mages play the Igor to the Magister Dr. Frankenstein.

I'd think mages which show potential would be taken as Igor, low level would just serve as parts to Frankenstein. I'm assuming the Magister has to have some motivation for taking an apprentice, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Mid-level has enough room to grow and enough influence to be noticed.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 16 juin 2013 - 07:17 .

[Hazegurl]

Palidane wrote...

I've never understood the sympathy some people have for Tevinter. Fenris tells us about his experiences there, and most of his claims are not subjective. He doesn't make generic accusations, he says "Yeah, I was born and raised a slave to a powerful magister. He forced several of his slaves into a death match for the honor of having a horrible experiment be performed on him. He had me serve food at meetings to intimidate the other magisters, put me on a literal leash to mock Qunari customs, and once murdered a small boy to fuel fireworks at a party". Those are factual claims, either they are true or they are not. We know Fenris isn't some random elf who is making this up as he goes along, because Danarius does come for him and most of his story is directly confirmed.

So it's not like the blood magic and slavery doesn't happen. Tevinter may have a bright side to it that we don't know about, but the evil doesn't just go away.

Right, and the fact that these are magisters and not just random mage thugs pretty says "this is the norm" in tevinter. not to mention Fenris' sister who sells him out for power, then proclaims that fenris had it easy. Now if you thought everything that Fenris said was bad about life as a slave in tevinter then being a nonslave must be worst. so it doesn't matter if they abolish slavery, that place sucks.

[Bleachrude]

I don't think Anders actually believed in the Chant...at least the part about the mages entering the golden city...

Which is why it's sol hilarious/satisfying to see him when Coryphus reveals that he was part of the mages that did try to enter the Golden City.

As for the Chantry itself, Corypheus himself confirms that the magisters thought the city was golden since before the ritual, they could tell it was.....so the chantry isn't lying there.

What MAY have happened (and what Corypheus himself doesn't seem to consider) is that simply entering the city immediately turned it black thus what they saw was a black city even though an instant beforehand, it was golden.

[Ieldra]

Bleachrude wrote...
I don't think Anders actually believed in the Chant...at least the part about the mages entering the golden city...

Which is why it's sol hilarious/satisfying to see him when Coryphus reveals that he was part of the mages that did try to enter the Golden City.

As for the Chantry itself, Corypheus himself confirms that the magisters thought the city was golden since before the ritual, they could tell it was.....so the chantry isn't lying there.

What MAY have happened (and what Corypheus himself doesn't seem to consider) is that simply entering the city immediately turned it black thus what they saw was a black city even though an instant beforehand, it was golden.

Not so. Corypheus says "We sought the golden light" and "the city was *supposed to be* golden". That's not a phrase you'd use had you seen it. It appears more plausible that the city had been described to them as golden, but it was really black all the time and they were misled by Dumat - or by whichever entity spoke to the magisters that they interpreted as Dumat's voice.

[In Exile]

Ieldra2 wrote...
Not so. Corypheus says "We sought the golden light" and "the city was *supposed to be* golden". That's not a phrase you'd use had you seen it. It appears more plausible that the city had been described to them as golden, but it was really black all the time and they were misled by Dumat - or by whichever entity spoke to the magisters that they interpreted as Dumat's voice.

DG confirmed that the Golden City did look golden (at least from the outside) and that records of that period survive. It's an old thread. The city could have been black on the inside - or it could have been a prison for the taint, or an illusion - but there's independent confirmation via the devs that, from the outside, it was Golden. 

Hence why Cory can say it was "supposed" to be golden - it wasn't just what he was told, but what he could see in his dreams. 

[BlueMagitek]

Of course Tevinter would still be evil, they completely destroyed Arlathan and, if nothing else, helped spread the Taint.

[LobselVith8]

In Exile wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Tevinter enslaves mages and non-mages in their society, but it seems to be the only society where elves can be more than servants - as Fenris' sister had the opportunity to become a Magister as an elven mage. I'm sure that there's more to Tevinter than slavery and abusing blood magic for obscene acts or parlor tricks (as even Wynne sounded interested in visiting Tevinter with Shale), but there are some valid reasons that characters condemn their society.

That's not true. In the Circles, we've seen no evidence of anti-elven sentiment. Hell, in Kirkwall for all their faults they have Orsino - an elf- as First Enchanter and no one objects to his position based on race. 

Magic is quite obviously the great equalizer, and we don't know if non-mage elves are on the status hierarchy at all vs. non-mage humans. 

Actually, the elven mage from the Circle can tell Duncan that he faces racism in the Circle of Ferelden, and the elven mage Eadric explains that he wants to excel as a mage because of how humans look down on elves. This racism may most likely be from the templars, rather than their fellow mages, but that still means that the Circle isn't free of anti-elven sentiment.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Actually, the elven mage from the Circle can tell Duncan that he faces racism in the Circle of Ferelden, and the elven mage Eadric explains that he wants to excel as a mage because of how humans look down on elves. This racism may most likely be from the templars, rather than their fellow mages, but that still means that the Circle isn't free of anti-elven sentiment.

That's a different kind of sentiment, though. It's very much like discrimation IRL, and we haven't seen enough of Tevinter to know whether elven Magisters are second class or not. If your standard for not racist is opportunity, then the Circle mages have it. If it means substantive equal treatment across groups, then we haven't seen enough of Tevinter to know that exists. 

So in that respect, just becuase opportunities exist doesn't mean the society is somehow egalitarian re: race. 

Modifié par In Exile, 16 juin 2013 - 05:41 .

[LobselVith8]

Bleachrude wrote...

I don't think Anders actually believed in the Chant...at least the part about the mages entering the golden city...

Anders already addressed in Awakening and the main Dragon Age II game that he did believe in the fable of the Golden City, and he has arguments about Merrill over her Dalish beliefs because they conflict with his Andrastian religious views:

Anders: Maybe you don't really understand the difference between spirits and demons.

Merrill: Did I ask you?

Anders: Spirits were the first children of the Maker, but He turned his back on them to dote on His mortal creations. The ones who resented this became demons, driven to take everything mortals had and gain back the Maker's favor.

Merrill: Your "Maker" is a story you humans use to explain the world. We have our own stories. I don't need to borrow yours.

That doesn't seem to me like a man who discards all the religious teachings of the Andrastian Chantry.

Bleachrude wrote...

Which is why it's sol hilarious/satisfying to see him when Coryphus reveals that he was part of the mages that did try to enter the Golden City.

What's hilarious is how Anders' prior characterization was rewritten to accomodate that little "revelation", which seems to actually contradict what the Andrastian Chantry preached about the fall of the Golden City.

Bleachrude wrote...

As for the Chantry itself, Corypheus himself confirms that the magisters thought the city was golden since before the ritual, they could tell it was.....so the chantry isn't lying there.

Except his dialogue has caused debate among fans since he seems to say that it was corrupt instead of Golden, and even wonders if Dumat had forsaken them.

Bleachrude wrote...

What MAY have happened (and what Corypheus himself doesn't seem to consider) is that simply entering the city immediately turned it black thus what they saw was a black city even though an instant beforehand, it was golden.

Or what may have happened was that the City was already Black prior to their arrival, since Corypheus states it wasn't Golden in his dialogue. That's why people continue to have this debates about the meaning of Corypheus' dialogue ever since.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...

What's hilarious is how Anders' prior characterization was rewritten to accomodate that little "revelation", which seems to actually contradict what the Andrastian Chantry preached about the fall of the Golden City.

Not that I disagree per se with how Anders was written, but I don't see how his line about the Maker and spirits/demons has anything to do with his views on the Golden City and mages.

Wynne for example is very skeptical of the story in DA:O, but she's blatantly an Andrastian. 

[EcreipRellim]

Tevinter isn't evil...every country in thedas is evil that's the whole point

[LobselVith8]

In Exile wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

What's hilarious is how Anders' prior characterization was rewritten to accomodate that little "revelation", which seems to actually contradict what the Andrastian Chantry preached about the fall of the Golden City.

Not that I disagree per se with how Anders was written, but I don't see how his line about the Maker and spirits/demons has anything to do with his views on the Golden City and mages.

His lines about the Golden City in Awakening and Dragon Age II have to do with his view on the Golden City, which directly contradict how he was characterized in Legacy.

I added the line about his Andrastian religious views with Merrill to show that he has religious debates with Merrill over her conflicting Dalish views about the denizens of the Fade, since she doesn't see them as Spirits and Demons, i.e. the First Children of the Maker. The point was to illustrate that Anders does, indeed, share the views of the Andrastian Chantry when he willing to espouse them and argue them with someone who was clearly raised with a different set of religious and cultural views.

In Exile wrote...

Wynne for example is very skeptical of the story in DA:O, but she's blatantly an Andrastian. 

Which has nothing to do with Anders mentioning the fable of the Golden City in Awakening and Dragon Age II as something he believed in, which has been noted by other fans as well.

[Welsh Inferno]

EcreipRellim wrote...

Tevinter isn't evil...every country in thedas is evil that's the whole point

No, the point is that none of them are evil. They all have good & bad bits. Shades of grey & all that.