1656 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

So if I am reading the responses from a number of threads correctly the Pro-Templar POV maintains:

1) Individual Rights can be violated if the potential for a threat exists, a crime need not be committed

Given that Rights are nothing more than an invention of humanity and onyl exist so long as humans with powers agree they exist....
Yes, if the threat is deemed serious enough.

2) Forcible Subjugation and Psychological or Physical Death without due process is acceptable

There is due process in most cases.

3) Constant surveillance "just in case" is reasonable

Constant survailance? Even in Kirkwall mages had some privacy.

[IceHawk-181]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Given that Rights are nothing more than an invention of humanity and onyl exist so long as humans with powers agree they exist....
Yes, if the threat is deemed serious enough.

Do they not teach the classics anymore? How about Early American history?
 
The fundamental basis of Free Western Society extending well back into the 16th Century holds that rights are inherent within the individual. Whether you want to seize on the Judeo-Christian conception of God Given rights as a component of your soul (Declaration of Independence) or a more secularized version in which humanity differentiates itself from the beasts of nature by entering into a compact with one another (Hobbes, et al) to restrain their full abilities.
 
The idea that individual rights are a function of the government is the very thing that an entire generation of humanity rejected starting in 1776 and continues as the most abiding principle of every major Free Power on Earth to this day.
 
If you think that your personal rights are a fiat of the "powers that be," I daresay you need to realize that "the powers that be" are just other people and as interchangeable as a pair of socks.
 
The entire foundation of the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the Geneva Convention, the Humans Rights' Charter, et al is exactly the opposite of your point here.
 
If this is the conclusion you reached at the end of your education I daresay your Liberal Arts and History teachers failed you horrendously.
 

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
There is due process in most cases.

Really?
What is the legal procedure to oppose forcible imprisonment of a child in a Circle?
What legal precedent did Jowan have to marshal a defense against being forcibly turned Tranquil?
What legal precedent exists for a Blood Mage to defend themselves as a threat?
On what grounds does a Mage commute a sentence of Tranquility or Death to imprisonment at Aeonar?
 
I assume you have canon examples of Due Process for each that completely invalidates the entire Mage Origin.
 

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Constant survailance? Even in Kirkwall mages had some privacy.

Would you consider it privacy if the FBI maintained a file on all citizens that track them no matter what and could be used at a moments notice to physically seize you?
 
Right now the nation is responding in disbelief and disgust at the realization that the Government was violating some small privacies, like phone and email conversations, imagine what would happen if it was made known that the government retained the ability to track every citizen in existence no matter what?
 
 

Modifié par IceHawk-181, 22 juin 2013 - 09:06 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ieldra2 wrote...

As for the real-world comparisons: those don't work because we don't have people with destructive powers which can't be separated from them, but the difference between "locking away someone because they might use their fists to kill someone" and doing the same with a mage is one of degree, not quality. Where you draw the line is by default arbitrary, but regardless of where you draw it or if you draw one at all, it does not justify subjecting people to the treatment mages get in circles - see frostajulies' comment.

Not true. TI's not jsut that mages have greater capacity for harm.
If that was the ONLY isse, thing might be differnet. But mages are actively PREYD upon by abominations.
The powers of mages are very abusable and tempting - some frighteningly so.

IT's not the power-hungry, unstable mages that are the problem. The problem is that normal, good-meaning mages can do hiorrific damage wihout wanting it. and even agaisnt their will.

Also, you appear to disregard some of the psychological effects. There is no better means to make mages lose any consideration for the non-mages than segregating them by force. If you want mages to keep the well-being of non-mages in mind and not take reckless risks with their powers in their presence, there is no better means than letting them make connections. Isolation breeds disregard.

Not entirely true.
Recent psychological experiments seem to indicate that isolation can make poeple to value other people more, because they desire to connect more.
And this was then applied to the Stanford experiment, where people whith less friends and who lived more isolated, were less likely to abuse their charges.

Jowan practiced blood magic, but he never caused any harm until he was cornered.

Yet.
Jowan dabbled a bit. Corruption works slowly.

[Lotion Soronarr]

IceHawk-181 wrote...
I take it you are one of the "Rights are a Function of Government allowances" people then...

In practice, that's how it is.

The only rights are those you can secure (or are given if you can't secure them).

The fundamental basis of Free Western Society extending well back into
the 16th Century holds that rights are inherent within the individual.

That is a belief. Nothing more.
It cannot be proven. It cannot be logicly argued.

And even tough I agree with you and I do belive in such things as objective morality and good, the problem is that from a practical standpoint it doesn't matter.

When a guy pulls out a gun and you say "I have the inherent right to live", your belief in that right won't stop him from goign "and I belive in the power of the bullet" and kill you.

Really?
What is the legal procedure to oppose forcible imprisonment of a child in a Circle?
What legal precedent did Jowan have to marshal a defense against being forcibly turned Tranquil?
What legal precedent exists for a Blood Mage to defend themselves as a threat?
On what grounds does a Mage commute a sentence of Tranquility or Death to imprisonment at Aeonar?

1) None. Because there's no point in opposing it. The law is clear. Either the child is a mage or it's not. If it's a mage, the law is clear.
2) Jowan could have always opted to try the Harrowing. Irwing would have let him try.
3) None really. Because the law is clear there too.
4) A mage can appeal to the First Enchanter or Knight-Commander.

You forget, TheDas doesn't have the modern judicial system and some things are rather clear-cut (like if one is a mage or not).

[IceHawk-181]

Morocco Mole wrote...

It always comes to this. Thedas not being the real (modern) world and not being able to live by our standards of what a right, just society would be. People see the mages and begin to naturally think "oppression! Tear it down! Fight the power!" but forget that mages are a powerful, dangerous force that uncontrolled can easily kill many, many people.

This is a poor goal post shifting maneuver; what makes a Mage inherently dangerous?
 
Does the capability of Magic somehow destroy a lifetime of Moral teaching?
 
Were Irving and Wynne just time bombs waiting to go off that needed to be sequestered for the good of the world?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ieldra2 wrote...
About oversight by representatives of an enemy ideology: the difference between a secular (for lack of a better word) oversight and a religious one is that the Chantry connects mages to the story of the Golden City and the darkspawn. The templars are, as I said, predisposed to revile mages on ideological grounds, while a secular power would simply classify them as dangerous. It's like you specially appoint ultra-nationalists to patrol areas with a high population of immigrants. It's a recipe for disaster.

Nope. Disagree entirely.
Templars aren't predisposed to hate/revile mages.

If there is any hate, it's FAR more likely to be the result of personal experience and the job than any Chantry teachings.

[Dave of Canada]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

This is a poor goal post shifting maneuver; what makes a Mage inherently dangerous?

Demons, abominations, blood magic, raising the dead, incinerating cities and the fact that they thrive on human suffering.

[IceHawk-181]

Lotion,
 
I honestly do not know where to begin with you.
 
Yes, the concept that rights are inherent in the individual is, for most, a belief.
 
Thomas Hobbes produced a rather convincing argument that they are, literally and logically, a function of Free Will and can only be circumscribed by force (being personal choice or external pressure) which serves to invalidate the "it's just a belief" piece.
 
Then again it is a philosophy that literally gave birth to the modern age and is directly responsible the existence of what we still term, the Free World, and the entire context of your life.
 
And there is a fundamental difference between having an inherent right and someone refusing to accept that; this is another thing Hobbes made a direct point of.
 
The compact of civilization only operates between consenting members. An individual who operates within the war of nature is a radical that will gladly operate in the fullest exertion of his inherent ability and right to cause harm if he chooses.
 
Also, on the point of Due Process.
You just claimed Due Process existed and then replied, line by line, that it does not exist.
 
And appealing to the individual who just condemned you is not Due Process.
 
Do you think Jowan asking nicely for understanding would have stopped his Tranquility?
 
No, Thedas does not function as a modern free society.
It is an authoritarian regime in which individuals are ground underfoot without legal recourse because of how they were born.
 
Sounds awesome.
 

[IceHawk-181]

1) Again, can someone explain to me why Magic forces Mages to chose to deal with Demons and go on killing sprees? Because, and while I might be mistaken, abominations are a rare occurrence and usually a function of desperation, not malice.
 
2) The "All Power Corrupts" trope is cute, but really non-sensical.

My favorite response, "80-Million American gun owners did not murder someone today..."
 
Obama has not nuked any nations today and I have managed not to beat my wife.

So is today just a lucky day? Or perhaps is there more to "corruption" than the simple exercise of authority?

 
3) Irving and Wynne believed in the Circle, they believed that Mages need instruction.
I never heard either endorse the concept that the Circles as they are were a great solution, that things are fair (Irving makes the opposite point in fact), or that imprisoning Mages is morally acceptable.
 
Irving is famous because he is a Mage who does his best to protect his charges, from everything, including the Templars.
 
 

[LobselVith8]

Morocco Mole wrote...

It always comes to this. Thedas not being the real (modern) world and not being able to live by our standards of what a right, just society would be. People see the mages and begin to naturally think "oppression! Tear it down! Fight the power!" but forget that mages are a powerful, dangerous force that uncontrolled can easily kill many, many people.

Which doesn't change the fact that characters in Thedas still oppose the Chantry controlled Circles on the merits of their own social perspective, to the point of condemning them as slavery (in their own moral viewpoint).

[BlueMagitek]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

This is seriously your argument?
 
That individual rights are a function of modern society and therefore it is acceptable to foist a system of subjugation and slavery upon a people because their contemporary political leaders operate on the concept that might makes right?
 
I take it you are one of the "Rights are a Function of Government allowances" people then...
 
Also, Jowan's motivation for dabbling in Blood Magic (Jealousy) is tossed aside once he has Lilly; he is done with Magic. Period.

I'm not here to argue against you, I do not wish to derail this thread, I'm simply stating what things are like in Thedas.  And what Jowan is really like, which you really just sort of ignored.  If you wish to see my arguments about mages and templars, please, go to just about any other topic about them.  They're more or less slathered over the DA:I forum.

And yes, I quite see how Jowan gave up magic.  So much that he didn't at all.

[Dave of Canada]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

1) Again, can someone explain to me why Magic forces Mages to chose to deal with Demons and go on killing sprees? Because, and while I might be mistaken, abominations are a rare occurrence and usually a function of desperation, not malice.

A mage can be seduced by a demon against their will, agreeing to things which they'd never agree under normal circumstance. Hell, some play dangerously close by taking what they can from demons in the hopes that they're strong enough to fight them off.
 

2) The "All Power Corrupts" trope is cute, but really non-sensical.

Except you're neglecting to mention one thing: You don't have magic. Magic can resolve all your problems, it's the ultimate answer to everything as long as you're powerful enough to do it. That drive for power is what's ultimately "corrupting".

We deal with our stress and problems because we've got no other alternative and our problems are minor compared to those of the commoners in our ancient past, let alone the Thedosian equivilant. Have you ever suffered a problem which you wish you could have magically solved?

Humans are selfish creatures, the idea that someone wouldn't abuse their powers for their own self-gain and interest is non-sensical. They might not resort to magical solutions immediately but when desperation kicks in, people become irrational and motivated by impulse.

Starving?
I'll make my neighbor give his loaf of bread to me, he doesn't need it. I do.

Rejected from that girl across the tavern?
She'll love me when I'm done with her.

You don't have the gold to pay the tax?
Perhaps you could throw some of that gold my way instead, tax collector? Let's forget about all of this. Thanks, you've been great.

A Lord fancies your daughter and rapes her?
Maybe he'll "willingly" jump off a cliff or slice his own throat, no-one will miss him.

Your wife is ill with fever during her pregnancy and you'll possibly lose both wife and child?
No worries, I've got blood magic. It's helped me so far. What do you mean I'm not powerful enough? I'll... kill the neighbor, maybe then I'll be strong enough. One life for two is worth it.

Your wife is distraught by your actions which resulted in saving her life, is she seriously considering leaving you?
She doesn't know what's good for her, I can't risk her telling the Templar. I'll make her not remember. I did this for her.

What if your neighbor's body is discovered and the Templar arrive to arrest you?
They won't take me away from my family, I'll do anything to stay with them.

Situation A: Full-blown abomination who ravages the city, killing hundreds including his own family.
Situation B: Resorting to full-blown blood magic to defend himself.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 22 juin 2013 - 11:01 .

[MWImexico]

Mmh the exemples you have given show only that magic could facilitate those actions, the problem is the state of mind of this person. If you want to steal / kill / misbehave, it's also possible without magic.

[MWImexico]

IceHawk-181 wrote...
Free Society is a choice; either you embrace the notion that an individual is an important and sacrosanct thing with inherent rights that cannot be arbitrarily rendered nonexistent unless they actually do harm, or else you endorse the concept of wielding majoritarian despotism and trampling of 49% of the population for the sake of the other 51%.

That seems to be the core of the problem. But perhaps a middle ground can be found?

Mages are not animals or objects. They are able to think, to learn and to make decisions for themselves. If they feel wronged, they will react, look at what happend in Kirkwall. People tend to revolt when they are pushed to their limits. 

Also, mages are not contagious, the comparaison is wrong. I think a solution should be adapted to the real, no more no less. These are human beings, humans with super-powers. They are potentially dangerous, yes, but still human beings.

Personnaly, I also think the circles should be reformed not suppressed. Ieldra2 has given a good alternative to the present system, something like that could work actually. Compromise is good if we are careful and aware of the situation.     

So what's wrong with the circle?
-Lack of freedom. I'm not sure of what can be done about it, theless, if the young mages can keep the hope that one day, if they behave well they might get out, that could be an improvement.
-Tranquility. I think the research about it should continue, knowing how to undo one thing isn't synonyme of automaticaly undo this thing. And with luck, useful things could be discovered in this area.
-Templar abuses. Well, I wonder how exactly those are trained, I wonder if they talk about this subject during their formation? Probably not, look at the result. They are payed to do this job, people don't become templar only by vocation. Perhaps the mages should rule themselves. And what if so? What is the worst case scenario? A circle uprising? Well, it happened before, no big deal.

Ideally, in the future, mages could be much better perceived by society. But for that, they should find a way to incorporate themselves into the system, making themselves useful once their training is completed. Spirit healers should be appreciated wherever they decide to go, battle mages could rejoin the army, etc.

Modifié par MWImexico, 23 juin 2013 - 12:01 .

[MWImexico]

He can still throw knives XD

[EChatty]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

2) Jowan could have always opted to try the Harrowing. Irwing would have let him try.

Sure, he would have let him, but no, he couldn't have. If questioned about it, Irving states unequivocally that if things would have been different.....but he had no choice Jowan was going to be made Tranquil, he just wants Lily to be punished for her part in it too. ****** for tat? Yes. Deserved? I think so too.

The reason being that the decision had already been made by Greagoir to tranquil Jowan, so he had no recourse.

Modifié par EChatty, 23 juin 2013 - 02:44 .

[Fuggyt]

Huyna wrote...




Rights of the minority are important, but they cannot and should not overrule the rights of majority. Majority  builds towns, majority  works at farms, and majority supports civilization.  

You could not possibly be more wrong.  The very concept of the Bill of Rights was to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority, as John Adams put it.   Suppose the majority of the population should decide tomorrow that people with green eyes should not be allowed to vote.  Are you okay with that?  Or are some rights simply inherent to the individual irrespective of the interests of others?  If your answer to the latter question is "no," turn in your freedom of speech. 

[ashesandwine]

I say we just stop arguing and let's fight it out. It is clear that mage supporters and templar supporters won't see eye to eye. If mages fully committed to fight for their "freedom", then I don't see any good reasons to criticize them for it. Let just let the victors decide. I personally will be fighting to keep the Circle with some changes.