1656 réponses à ce sujet

[MWImexico]

MisterJB wrote...

MWImexico wrote...
I believe you are missing my point. Here I blame the templars for being excessif, they fear too much and this fear prevent them for doing their job properly. If you re-read the first pages of Asunder you can't possibly miss that, the situation described is awful. I belive templars should correct their behaviour, fear/paranoia does not justify that.

Now, of course there is poor people who suffer elsewhere but there is also average people who are happy to enjoy their freedom, nobles/richs or simple farmers.

If (the true) Cole had not being brutalised during his arrival to the tower, he would probably still be alive by the end of he book and all this spirit/demon thing would never have happened.

What you claimed was that you didn't think that Circles can be preferable to life on the outside. I pointed you to Darktown to prove otherwise.

What happened with Cole was a result of neglect, not fear; it's not justifiable, of course, but it's a different subject. Fear can lead to abuses but I see no evidence of it here. Ultimately, templars also exist to protect the world from magic and some suspicion is only healthy.
When they start Tranquilizing mages for being outside their quarters after curfew, then you'll be right.

Well to be accurate, JK talked about the " the average commoner" and not about Darktown specificaly.

About what happened to Cole, no It's not a different subject since it show how and why I said it's may be preferable to live outside the circle. And I also believe fear can cause bad treatments, like when the templars who brought Cole to the tower called him "Mage" like if it was an insult. Plus Cole seems to depict the templars as a bit paranoid : the mages seem not allowed to meet each other privately, to talk or to have intimate relation ship without being suspected of comploting.

[vpacheco1984]

MisterJB wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...
Templars are like Orlesian chevaliers above law and can do anything they like whitout consequences no one care like no one care what others do to elves.

Oh, please. Right off the top of my head, I can come up with fours references solely in DA2 that imply templars have accountability and can't do justwhat they please.

1-Hawke can say to Alrik "The Chantry frowns upon templars who take advantage of their charges."
2-Alan says that the Templars in Kirkwall beat them and nobody does a thing. This means that in Starkhaven, either the mages weren't beaten or, if they were, someone would do something about it.
3-The fact that Karras threatens Alan into not telling anyone he has been raping him, shows he fears repercussion if he found out.
4-Meredith can't even search the tower after several Circle blood mages were found without asking Elthina first .

And that's just the top of my head. I'm certain that if I were to scour the games, I would find more.

1. Just becuase the Chantry frowns upon templars who take an advantage of their charges doesn't mean they will actually do anything about it. And we see no templars being punished for the abuses they heaped upon mages.
2. He stated like they did get beaten and raped in Starkhaven and some times something was done about it but I got the impression that the templars were allowed as much free rain over mages as they had in kirkwall.
3. Just becasue Karras threatened him with tranquililty to keep him quiet about raping might have been to keep Alain from himself I doubt he was worried about punishment after all Alain was just a mage and mages ask for it don't they Mister JB.
4. Meredith could search the tower without asking Elthina first, Orsino just going to get Elthina's help in raining Meredith in, which she wasn't doing. 

There was no templars were punished for the abuses they heaped on mages over and over again. If anything they were rewarded for it. 

[MisterJB]

MWImexico wrote...
Well to be accurate, JK talked about the " the average commoner" and not about Darktown specificaly.

And what is the "average commoner"? Lowtown? Not much of an improvement.

About what happened to Cole, no It's not a different subject since it show how and why I said it's may be preferable to live outside the circle.

What happened to Cole didn't have anything to do with fear. He was forgotten, that is awful. But it's not the same as fear leading people to do something.
Oh and considering that Cole's mother was killed by his father after Cole was revealed to be a mage, the templars probrably saved his life by taking him away from him.
Granted, his subsequent death makes it kind of a moot point but Cole's father is hardly alone in hating mages. Sometimes, they are much safer in the tower and the people are safer with them there.

And I also believe fear can cause bad treatments, like when the templars who brought Cole to the tower called him "Mage" like if it was an insult. Plus Cole seems to depict the templars as a bit paranoid : the mages seem not allowed to meet each other privately, to talk or to have intimate relation ship without being suspected of comploting.

People fear people that can kill them with a thought, that's nothing strange. But I don't see anything in those first pages that leads me to believe mages are being mistreated over fear. Tensions are growing but that's about it.

[vpacheco1984]

They save Cole only to let him died from starvation or the injuries they inflicted on him. How did they save him MisterJB? He died anyway they didn't save him they just killed him in another more horrible way, locked away in the dark as his body slowly ate itself and his body dried out from dehydration or well he slowly died from internal bleeding. Again I ask HOW THE **** DID THE SAVE HIM?

[The Hierophant]

Vpacheco1984 wrote...

3. Just becasue Karras threatened him with tranquililty to keep him quiet about raping might have been to keep Alain from himself I doubt he was worried about punishment...

Karras threatening Alain to keep quiet about the rape clearly shows that he feared the repurcussions of his actions, even when under Meredith's command.

after all Alain was just a mage and mages ask for it don't they MisterJB.

Keep it classy.

[MWImexico]

MisterJB wrote...
Granted, his subsequent death makes it kind of a moot point but Cole's father is hardly alone in hating mages. Sometimes, they are much safer in the tower and the people are safer with them there.

Yeah, only if the templars do their job properly, which was my point earlier.

MisterJB wrote...
.. But I don't see anything in those first pages that leads me to believe mages are being mistreated over fear. Tensions are growing but that's about it.

Ok, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, again.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Yep because it's safer be around armed haters than unarmed.
Few quotes from asunder
"Few of the tower’s templars were kind, and most believed that mages constantly conspired to commit unspeakable horrors . . . when the truth was usually much more mundane. Most of their
conversation consisted of gossip."

"-You think I don’t know every templar in the tower by now?
-Some of them far better than I’d like. She touched the bruise on
her cheek, and the elven boy scowled but said nothing."

"Two armored templars stood in front of an open cell, one holding up a glowlamp. Neither wore a helmet,and thus he recognized them— not enough to know their names,for he knew few, but enough to know that these two were merciless hunters, templars who had served their order for so many years that what ever pity they’d once been capable of had been ground into dust."

-Careful, Lamp Holder cautioned. Th isone knows how to
conjure fire.
The other, whom Cole thought of as Big Nose, snorted contemptuously.
-I’d like to see her try it.
The whimpering came from within the cell. Lamp Holder
rolled his eyes and turned away. “I wouldn’t worry. There wasn’t
much fight left when we caught her. Even less now.”
-Huh. Think she’ll make it?
-Probably better if she didn’t.
The pair exchanged knowing glances as the despairing cries became louder. Big Nose shrugged
and slammed the cell door shut, fumbling with a large ring of iron keys until he found the one he wanted. The lock slid into place with an ominous sound."

Modifié par TheKomandorShepard, 06 juillet 2013 - 10:35 .

[Xilizhra]

Keep it classy.

Not really that far from what JB's said in the past, so it's not unwarranted.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...

Keep it classy.

Not really that far from what JB's said in the past, so it's not unwarranted.

Please, do show me a post of mine where I even remotelly suggested mages "ask for it". I'd like to see it.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Keep it classy.

Not really that far from what JB's said in the past, so it's not unwarranted.

Please, do show me a post of mine where I even remotelly suggested mages "ask for it". I'd like to see it.

I do know that just living in a city that contained a magical explosion is justification for being murdered, which you made a whole thread about. Because they were mages.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Keep it classy.

Not really that far from what JB's said in the past, so it's not unwarranted.

Please, do show me a post of mine where I even remotelly suggested mages "ask for it". I'd like to see it.

I do know that just living in a city that contained a magical explosion is justification for being murdered, which you made a whole thread about. Because they were mages.

The elimination of the source of conflict(them being mages had nothing to do with it) in order to prevent the auto-destruction of an entire city is quite different from rape which is singularly vile and serves no purpose beyond satisfying the rapist and swelling his/her ego.
Supporting one does not, by any stretch of the imagination, equals supporting the other. Conclusion, you have no basis for your accusation.

Modifié par MisterJB, 06 juillet 2013 - 10:35 .

[Xilizhra]

The elimination of the source of conflict(them being mages had nothing to do with it) in order to prevent the auto-destruction of an entire city is quite different from rape which is singularly vile and serves no purpose beyond satisfying the rapist and swelling his ego.
Supporting one does not, by any stretch of the imagination, equals supporting the other. Conclusion, you have no basis for your accusation.

The city was being attacked by demons, thus rendering the attack on the mages worse than useless by any definition when the templars could have been fighting off demons. Which means that a mage-siding Hawke actually protects the city to a much greater degree than the templars. In addition to the templars being the main source of the conflict to begin with. So no, it's really not all that different from rape in the end; Meredith's motives were just as impure (though defined more by madnes; however, a Hawke who supports her depravity has no such excuse, nor do the remainder of the templars).

[MisterJB]

I won't argue with you over the vality of the templar ending since I have already covered everything you said in the OP of my thread. Suffice it to say, annuling a Circle to protect the people of Kirkwall is most certainly not the same as raping mages for the sake of it and supporting one has nothing to do with supporting the other.
According to your logic, since you support killing all templars who don't surrender, you must also think female templars "ask for it" if they are raped by the mages.

Bottom line, you could not find a single post of me even remotelly suggesting mages "ask for it" and decided to go to the closest thing you could find and twist it around until it served your purpose. And in the process, you managed to call everyone who picked the templar ending a rapist. Nice going.

Modifié par MisterJB, 06 juillet 2013 - 11:29 .

[Xilizhra]

Bottom line, you could not find a single post of me even remotelly suggesting mages "ask for it" and decided to go to the closest thing you could find and twist it around until it served your purpose. And in the process, you managed to call everyone who picked the templar ending a rapist. Nice going.

Every Hawke who sided with the templars is as bad as or worse than a rapist, yes.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 06 juillet 2013 - 11:34 .

[MisterJB]

Backpedalling now? Suddenly, it's "Hawke the fictional character" but a few posts ago it was "JB".

edit: Oh, and btw, if your prerrogative is that the templar ending is as bad or worse than rape, fine. I don't care.
But, objectivelly, speaking, it is completely separated; in action, motive and intent; from the rapes commited by Karras and Alrik. Therefore, supporting one, still doesn't mean supporting the other.

Modifié par MisterJB, 06 juillet 2013 - 11:53 .

[Inprea]

MisterJB wrote...

Hum, no. Sir JK said that the Circles, in certain cases, provide better living conditions than those given to the average thedosian to which MWI responded he did not think it was so. I showed him a group of people living in much worse conditions than the Circle mages.
That's all my post extend to, really altough we can discuss this if you wish.

Did that group represent the average in Dark Town? They are after all refugees in a city that doesn't exactly welcome them. It seems that using those living in a slum would be intentionally scewing the comparison away from the average and towards the worse case scenario. It would be like trying to claim the average person lived like they down in high town. As mages are well educated it seems like you'd need to compare them to a group of equal standing if you want to talk about how they should live so I believe you need to compare them to other forms of skilled labor or craftsmen not to refugees. What value would you put on knowing that should you have a child someone will take that child away and you'll never see said child again? For all you know the templar took your infant son or daughter and tossed them into the lake. It's unlikely but for all you know that's what happened.

MisterJB
Actions do not occur in a vacuum. The "freedom" or the pursuit of it by mages will, inevitably, have consequences on the general population of Thedas.Therefore, if we are to dicusse an hypothetical freedom of mages, we must also discuss the effect it will have on the people of Thedas to determine if it is something that should be pursued. That is, assuming we are taking to wellfare of others into account and not just claiming that the individual freedom of a mage is that much more important than the lives of the non-mages who surround him/her.

If the actions of mages affected no one but themselves, then there would be no dicussion and your claim that "because someone else has it worse, doesn't mean I don't have it bad and shouldn't work towards improving it" would be the uncontested truth. But that is not so because in this case, "improving it" might make those who have it worse than you become even more deplorable.

Logically, one of the relevant factors in such a study would be the living conditions of mages in the Circles versus those of "free" non-mages outside of it; hence, why Pro-Templars mention how certain "free" people live in slums such as Darktown while mages live in Drakon's former palace; as well as how the freedom of mages would affect these people; who now not only live in horrible conditions, but have yet to contend with blood mages, abominations, untrained mages or just flat out having yet another class above them; not to mention how the pursuit of this freedom involving armed conflict the likes of which not seen since Andraste walked Thedas.

Yes, I am aware that mages provide their own upkeep; altough the Chantry provides the buildings; and trust me when I say that I am frigthfully aware of how easily mages can earn wealth with their power. That is why I believe equality is impossible, BTW.

Allowing themselves to remain locked up will also have an affect. Tell me. How many people do you believe the church has killed by claiming that the study of the body and how it works is blood magic and therefor evil? How many lives has the suppression of knowledge cost? Yet the church uses blood magic in the controling of mages.

The templars are suppose to protect the mages as well yet have you ever seen a templar protect a mage? Have you ever seen a templar punished for beating, raping or murdering a mage? I can't help but think back to the tower in DA:O. When the tower was over run with abominations the templars locked the mages in the tower with the abominations and prepared to murder them. That seems like quite a failing of their responsibilities. They sure didn't protect the mages and none of that there was nothing I could do bull. It was the templars responsiblity to protect the mages that followed the rules and they failed. They did worse then fail they locked those mages in with the abominations just like they lock them into the fade with a demon.

Should the fear of making things worse keep us from trying to make things better? It has been said that humans are more inclined to suffer then try to improve their station for fear of the unknown. What do you expect people to do when their suffering has surpassed that fear?

Now you mention certain people and then note the slums like dark town. Isn't that bias? If you're going to compare them to certain people as you say why not compare them to the people living in high town? Both of them are extremes after all. There is locations inbetween after all. Don't those citizens you mention already have to deal with blood mages and abominations? The templars sure don't seem to get them all. What about the damage done by templar rades on the area in search of mages? Isn't a templar yet another social rank above those people you mention? I'm reminded of a group of templars in chapter 3 of DA2 preparing to kill a woman who simply providing her cousin with a place to stay for the night and some food.

It seems to me given that the templars have been hunting, imprisoning, killing or murdering mages for hundreds of years there has been a conflict happening for quite some time. The templars are just upset the mages decided to fight back in mass. Do you just stand back and watch someone steel your child though knowing you won't even be able to provide for that child? The templars didn't even let the mages write to their children or send them some gold to help them out in life.

Are things equal now? If you're striving for equality then siding with the templars doesn't seem to be working either.

Modifié par Inprea, 07 juillet 2013 - 05:27 .

[The Red Onion]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

alexbing88 wrote...
I think I owe a clarification: I am saying that if anyone declares that genocide is acceptable in any given context, it would be highly questionable to suggest the same context to be anologous to RL. If someone says "Chantry genocide on mages is justified," but then suggests that such a decision can be derived from RL morals, then such a person would have some serious explaining to do.

Umm... I don't see what's strage there.
Morals are largely subjective. And wether an action can be justified, depends on how you are justifiying it.
Logicly justified?
Practicly justified?
Morally justified?

The question that needs answering is:  can the greater good (prevention of greater evil) justify the use of lesser evil under any circumstances?
Kill 10 to save 1000?
Or do nothing and watch 1000 die?
Can sacrificing lives in the name of morality be even called moral?

Sorry for getting back to you so late - I had been away.

FWIW I don't want to risk causing offense through disagreement, and I must implore you to not be offended even if you might not agree with what I say.

[1] I had explicitly limited my statement to judgements that are contingent on moral grounds. When you divide things into categories of practicality, logic, or moral, I could ask whether the underpinnings of your logic or your practicality are themselves contingent on some hidden morals. As for the rest, I really don't want to harp on the note about genocide - if you actually do not feel what is strange in the problem I posed... well... I respect your outlook nevertheless.

[2] You question, which according to you is the question worth answering, is actually a question about Utilitarianism, which is a moral opinion generally first credited to a fellow named John Stuart Mills. According to such an opinion, the good of the many outweight the good of the few as a rule. You will not be surprised to hear that a big objection to his opinion is precisely what you have said above: what if it involves sacrificing lives?

My own objection (I imagine there are others) to absolute Utilitarianism as a rule, is that if you apply the rule beyond a critical frequency in the question of lives, you will actually anniliate a majority of the populace, which is difficult to condone.

Again you don't have to agree; you could argue that what you propose does not apply the rule beyond a critical frequency. Whether it does or not is an emprical question. Even if DA3 Chantry does end up applying the rule beyond critical frequency, you can still argue that BW fracked their own lore to enforce this result. So once again, you are totally free to keep your stance as is.

Modifié par alexbing88, 07 juillet 2013 - 07:17 .

[Sir JK]

Right, Mr JB, Inprea and MWImexico:

Just to be clear: What I said that on a good day life in the Circle is probably better than the average theodosian. Not that it always was. I also said that there was no guarantee that a good day would ever happen.
There's no doubt that for some mages life is hell from day one. There is also no doubt that even on a good day it's not easy. But these good days are not so farfetched. I am not trying to say that mages should be happy with what they got here. I'm not saying they should be satisfied with that. It's way too inconsistent to be labelled as "a good life".

But it's not an impossible one to live. And probably considerably better than the life of say... refugees, prostitutes, orphans, fishermen and farmers living under debts, anyone living on the Nevarran border, any villager in the Anderfels, most cityelves and so forth.

On a good day.

On a bad day the situation in darktown looks like an improvement.

[Xilizhra]

Keep in mind that even on a good day, there's still always the fear of it instantly becoming a bad day.

[In Exile]

alexbing88 wrote...
My own objection (I imagine there are others) to absolute Utilitarianism as a rule, is that if you apply the rule beyond a critical frequency in the question of lives, you will actually anniliate a majority of the populace, which is difficult to condone.

The response is simple: certain rules have inherent utility, and breach of the rule itself should be considered a harm to the "greater good". Put another way, the actual view of "rule"-utilitarianism is like a kind of "soft" deontology, where you have a lot of duty set of moral principles (i.e., moral obligations), but the metaphysical primitive is flexible. 

[Sir JK]

Xilizhra wrote...

Keep in mind that even on a good day, there's still always the fear of it instantly becoming a bad day.

Just so... I guess one could say that as a rule you are just one guard-shift away from a bad day.

Which is utterly unacceptable.

[The Red Onion]

In Exile wrote...

alexbing88 wrote...
My own objection (I imagine there are others) to absolute Utilitarianism as a rule, is that if you apply the rule beyond a critical frequency in the question of lives, you will actually anniliate a majority of the populace, which is difficult to condone.

The response is simple: certain rules have inherent utility, and breach of the rule itself should be considered a harm to the "greater good". Put another way, the actual view of "rule"-utilitarianism is like a kind of "soft" deontology, where you have a lot of duty set of moral principles (i.e., moral obligations), but the metaphysical primitive is flexible. 

Right right ... I looked that up just now. But what is your view on the Utility Monster? Smacks of blood magic, methinks.

[Xilizhra]

Sir JK wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Keep in mind that even on a good day, there's still always the fear of it instantly becoming a bad day.

Just so... I guess one could say that as a rule you are just one guard-shift away from a bad day.

Which is utterly unacceptable.

Hence the revolution.

[In Exile]

alexbing88 wrote...
Right right ... I looked that up just now. But what is your view on the Utility Monster? Smacks of blood magic, methinks.

I think it's context sensitive. There's some scale where a large enough good, a great enough danger and a small enough sacrifice are going to exist, and then sacrificing the few for the many is justified. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

vpacheco1984 wrote...
3. Just becasue Karras threatened him with tranquililty to keep him quiet about raping might have been to keep Alain from himself I doubt he was worried about punishment after all Alain was just a mage and mages ask for it don't they Mister JB.

Wut? I dont tfollow that logic.

4. Meredith could search the tower without asking Elthina first, Orsino just going to get Elthina's help in raining Meredith in, which she wasn't doing.

Could she? It wasn't clear. What was clear that mages made a big ruckus over having the tower searched.
Now, does that sound like a big deal if as many claim, mages have no privacy whatsoever? If there are no doors and templars can watch mages bathe and mages have no privacy - what is the point of a tower search?

Face it, a tower search should be comeptlely lawfull and simple, especially given the circumstances with the blood mages.