2858 réponses à ce sujet

[TheLastArchivist]

I have stage 4 stomach cancer so don't preach to me about harsh reality or academic perspectives, OK? Faith is not the automatic consequence of tribulation. If people need a crutch to get through life (as you describe faith) then they are entitled to it but it doesn't make that faith respectable. Lots of people depend on alcohol or drugs to get by, does that make crack sacred?
 
She explains that, quite clearly. Accepting a truth claim with insufficient evidence is a rather stupid thing to do.
 
But that is not what happens. She doesn't just say "You're stupid" and close her mind, she explains her logic. The "evidence" is all unreliable hearsay while the conflicting evidence is much stronger.
 
Sure she can. She lives with it, she stays and carries on, she just doesn't bend to your will.

As I recall, you're the one who addressed my post first. 

 

You sustained my argument gave the impression that I thought the populace tended to be authoritary. I did not. You put words in my mouth back there. What I stated was that the populace tends to be conservative, a term that I used with the purpose to avoid a very common mistake, which is to confuse a conservative set of moral values with a tendency towards authoritary behaviour.

 

And as everyone knows, school and college students tend to make that mistake. Why? Because they are protected by their entourage. This life in a bubble makes their view of such things as faith and religion to become very shallow. They have an idealized concept of what they are, but not a realistic one.

 

So to them, whoever has deep-rooted beliefs in some traditional religion is a fanatic or worse. Usually, these people like to slander or make fun of religious institutions, such as the Church or Islam. And why? Because that's what they're taught to do. They're taught to think -either by family, by teachers or friends- things like: religion is the opium of peoples. A marxist statement, I think, made no doubt to demoralize religion in a time when a lot of political upheaval was taking place in Europe.  

 

What I don't understand is why you are trying to turn this into a personal discussion. It's the kind of issue that's already been discussed everywhere to exhaustion. Both in academic environments as well as internet forums. 

 

 

 

Having grown up in that kind of bubble, I've once been someone who used to laugh at some religions and beliefs as well. Influenced, of course, by the whole fake atheist revolution going on in the media. When I grew up a bit more, I learned to know where the feeling of desperation came from and to respect those who have the need for religion and faith in their lives. Which is why I hate characters like Sera.

 

They have the same childish mind that learns to judge and despise all that doesn't fit into their narrow philosophy. Only they are right, only they know how people think and the world works. If you don't mistreat a noble, Sera kills him. If you don't harm him in some way, she thinks you're an arsehole. Like so many people, she doesn't accept other people don't feel the same way she does regarding many things. And that they may be right. Either you're just like her or you deserve to be despised and hated. To me, that's incredibly authoritary on her part.

 

She makes fun of all aristocrats in your party, regardless of their character. Listen to her banter with Vivienne or Dorian. She's downright prejudiced. Isn't that an attempt at censorship, the sister of tyranny?

 

And that's the first thing she shouldn't be if she wants things to change. Where's the freedom to disagree and still be respected for standing for what you think is right? When did she have the right to kill a noble just because she hates him? You do realize that's right next to fascism, right?

 

If she were a true revolutionary, fairness would be the first word in her diccionnary. Fairness for all. Not only people with whom she can identify. That's what someone who dreams of a fair, equalitarian society holds most dear.

 

But it seems like there was no room for it because "bitchballs" took its place. Or arsehole. Take your pick.

 

 

 

PS: I'm sorry, but did you try to play the blame card to win an internet discussion? Really?

[Danadenassis]

I think we can agree that how we perceive others, and ourselves, will be different.

 

It is like words. Each word we use is a combination of all the associations we got to that word combined with the settings of the associations and where we use it. That is just words, now imagine something as complicated to understand as others, or even ourselves.

 

My theory is that this is a reason why social sciences, psychology and such, are not considered proper science by many; it is simply too complicated, with too many variables so it doesn't look like it is a pattern in it all at least for some.

 

One person explained it by comparing a human's reaction with a die. He found humans more random, more unpredictable. I don't agree that humans are more random, fortunately, but humans, unlike a six-sided die won't automatically gravitate towards the average value between the two extremes like a die would.

 

For some does that make the human mind insane, not "scientific", but it is always a reason behind it and probably many.

 

We get something like 2million sensory impressions every second. Most get filtered out, some do we notice depending on how severe they seem, but imagine a system that got so many messages every second...and then ask yourself if we can manage to not be influenced by them, or that they won't alter our perceptions of others. On top of that, imagine judging someone else and consider how much that person goes through every second. Does it then sound reasonable that we can completely understand that person?

 

It is more than reasonable that we do not agree on Sera, but hopefully do we understand enough about each other to get along and keep making this world a better place.

 

[cindercatz]

I have one lunatic's word that this man is my enemy. Yes he attacked me after I crashed his meeting and killed two of his guards then chick I don't know shoots him in the face.

I know I'm skipping the point-counterpoint thing, but I just want to point something out. She doesn't even kill him because he's your enemy. She kills him because he's a haughty, arogant sob with murderous proclivities and an inflated opinion of his status. She invites you to see what she does, then to feel you out and see if she can get behind your Inquisition. It's not a job interview. It's a mission statement. Then you can take it or leave it.

[juliet_capulet]

I admit that at first, I could not stand Sera. I thought she was an annoying B.  But after talking to her more and having her in my party, she's really not so bad. In fact, I think she is absolutely hilarious. And she's very likeable IMO. Is she crazy? Yes, but so what lol.

[10K]

Half the time I have no idea what she's talking about, and she disregards her own heritage. Overall she's just annoying and say stupid stuff.

[skotie]

I know I'm skipping the point-counterpoint thing, but I just want to point something out. She doesn't even kill him because he's your enemy. She kills him because he's a haughty, arogant sob with murderous proclivities and an inflated opinion of his status. She invites you to see what she does, then to feel you out and see if she can get behind your Inquisition. It's not a job

Ok so how is she helping me exactly? Let's remember I'm the only person known who has a chance to close the breech, she just risked my life for no reason at all, except I guess to show me what she can do, also her own amusement (stolen pants). I also didn't get the chance to find out if this "villian" actually was an enemy of mine or the extent of his associates plans. What good reason is there to take her with me? She just proved I would be far better off without her childish pranks putting me in more danger than I already am and getting in the way of what I need to do.

 

Look I think it's great you guys love Sera, I'm just not really seeing a good reason to bring her along and no I don't need to metagame like previous posters have stated, first impressions are huge Sera's gave me a really bad one. I would like to know one thing though, why do you guys care so much that people don't like her? Why do you feel like other people not liking her are at fault, I keep getting the impression that's what you guys think.

 

Go ahead and pick any other character you want tell me you don't like them and I won't even bother asking you why not, because you have your reasons and that is good enough. Why is that not good enough in the case of Sera though?

[Nathair Nimheil]

You put words in my mouth back there. What I stated was that the populace tends to be conservative, a term that I used with the purpose to avoid a very common mistake, which is to confuse a conservative set of moral values with a tendency towards authoritary behaviour.

No, the words were in my mouth. Conservatism tends to be linked to authoritarianism. Analysis and documentation goes back to Adorno in 1950, famously supported by Altemeyer in the '80s, Christie and W. F. Stone in the '90s, Joost et al. in the early 21st and so on. The connection is well supported which is why I mentioned it.
 

PS: I'm sorry, but did you try to play the blame card to win an internet discussion? Really?

I don't know what that is in reference to, I don't even know what a "blame card" is. So no.

What occurred between the two personal bits I responded to made it quite clear to me, and to everyone else I am sure, why you don't like Sera. Understood.

[Nathair Nimheil]

Half the time I have no idea what she's talking about, and she disregards her own heritage.

The beliefs and traditions of the Dalish are not "the heritage" of city elves.

[cindercatz]

For someone that isn't interested in discussing the failings of a particular program, you sure seem to be trying to excuse the his grievance, the hypocrisy of legally mandating employers to make their hiring decisions based on gender or race as a way of "ameliorating systemic disadvantages" based on gender or race. Nobody comes out the better for it, you even encourage prejudices about whether women and racial minorities are actually qualified for the jobs they hold. Exactly how does this help?

Not to mention the point you make above would seem to support the idea that people have no right to object to unequal treatment according to gender or race. "Sorry, we value whiteness more than blackness, and you are not entitled to equal treatment because we think this is best for society." How is that different? Its acceptable as long as its in the "best interest of society" to deny people jobs they're qualified for according to race? If the end goal is to create that meritocratic society, inflicting inequity is hypocrisy.
 
Except that the society implementing these programs would seem to be aiming for a meritocracy in which race is not a factor that holds people back, certainly the idea that basing such decisions on race is wrong is part of the very premise of desiring to reduce the harm caused by institutional racial and social stratification. If it isn't, why do it? How is inflicting inequity on a person based on such factors ever acceptable, especially when you're supposed reason for doing so is to correct the very same inequity in others, which by pursuing such a course you must believe is wrong. Of course since I don't believe such measures are even necessary to correct the inequity, or indeed much more than the removing of active barriers and socially discouraging prejudiced attitudes, I doubt we'll agree. I see it as an imbalance that will then correct itself eventually, given time. You obviously disagree.

I'm trying not to get into this too much here and now, but I'll say this is the crux of the problem with our whole political system. Neither side is completely right on either side of this issue, and lives are mangled and destroyed either way you go. "The Greater Good" means squat when people you might otherwise agree with use it as some abstraction to justify any pain, damage their position does to real, everyday, individual people. But everybody tends to fall into teams instead of realizing when the extremes of their position start to do more harm than good. People are more likely to favor whatever gets them an individual advantage or supports their bias than to legitimately seek fair resolutions. Or the best resolutions when somebody has to just plain lose. (Like, environmental devastation trumps profit and specific industry. Sorry.)

 

You did a great job of laying out the severe problems with the current system and the justification for it, and I agree with your points there. But just doing away with it is at the very least as destructive. But a real meritocratic system, which is what's truly best for society and fair to all our members, requires empirically measuring each resume against the other, and embracing an individualistic mindset in regards social policy and law, with the acceptance that nothing can ever be truly perfect in every instance, but that we have a societal obligation to always try and be better. That's in direct conflict with how our culture is taught to think, which is tribal opposition, extremely flawed generalizations be damned. The whole "salad bowl" vs. "melting pot" debate, but even that assumes collective mindset. But I absolutely believe that's a systemic shift that needs to happen now. 

 

Regarding Sera, she judges everybody individually, and meets out her justice to each his own. Y'know, she doesn't lump all her well to do targets together. A prank here, a killing there, punishment to fit the crime. I absolutely love that about her. She has her ingrained social bias, but she maintains an individual filter, and she's introspective enough to at least acknowledge her own failings. She might have sharply stated opinions, but she doesn't condemn anybody just for disagreeing with her. She's more concerned with individual, personal justice, and challenging others' hardened attitudes more than reinforcing her own. I wish more people's thinking was so nuanced. 

 

And yeah she has a position, because milk sops don't get much done. (Well, I guess they make good middle men. Varric's kind of a milk sop.. Anyway ^^)

[cindercatz]

Ok so how is she helping me exactly? Let's remember I'm the only person known who has a chance to close the breech, she just risked my life for no reason at all, except I guess to show me what she can do, also her own amusement (stolen pants). I also didn't get the chance to find out if this "villian" actually was an enemy of mine or the extent of his associates plans. What good reason is there to take her with me? She just proved I would be far better off without her childish pranks putting me in more danger than I already am and getting in the way of what I need to do.

 

Look I think it's great you guys love Sera, I'm just not really seeing a good reason to bring her along and no I don't need to metagame like previous posters have stated, first impressions are huge Sera's gave me a really bad one. I would like to know one thing though, why do you guys care so much that people don't like her? Why do you feel like other people not liking her are at fault, I keep getting the impression that's what you guys think.

 

Go ahead and pick any other character you want tell me you don't like them and I won't even bother asking you why not, because you have your reasons and that is good enough. Why is that not good enough in the case of Sera though?

My point was that she wasn't there to please the Inquisitor. It's more 'This is what I do, and this twit demonstrates our interests might align. Also, **** just got real, and I might like to get involved, because I'm really kind of a civic minded kinda chick. Y'know, if you're cool about it..'  

 

I personally have no problem with whether you like her or not; it's the thread topic. It is kind of grating to see derogatory comments about her speech pattern or her social attitude, because those are classist statements, knowing or not, but everybody has their own tastes. I'm here because character discussion is interesting, and how and why people can have diametrically opposed reactions to certain characters is interesting. Thread proves it, I think.

[skotie]

 

I personally have no problem with whether you like her or not; it's the thread topic. It is kind of grating to see derogatory comments about her speech pattern or her social attitude, because those are classist statements, knowing or not, but everybody has their own tastes. I'm here because character discussion is interesting, and how and why people can have diametrically opposed reactions to certain characters is interesting. Thread proves it, I think.

I know it's the topic I just feel like no matter what people post they dislike about her it seems someone(not you just an example) feels we aren't being fair and needs to explain her for us "Well you just don't understand. Sera is this way but you can't see that this is why you are wrong." I mean sometimes you just don't like a person, should we feel bad because people exist that we don't like or something?

[NugHugs]

We're talking about the character, in place, in the fiction, as she's written. She laughs. It's been not even five minutes since seeing this kid murdered, and she's laughing because I took the noble's stuff. I think it's messed up that she laughs. I do, and if that's weird that I think it's messed up, so be it.

 

Because that's awful writing, isn't it? I feel like that's awful writing.

 

I guess you're saying that it should be considered a normal reaction within the game fiction? I don't know. I don't think that's how the fiction portrays itself - at least not consistently.

Just want to point out that the internal thoughts and feelings of an individual that provoke their external reaction won't always correlate with your own. Your reason for not laughing shouldn't automatically be assigned as Sera's reason for laughing. Everyone expresses themselves differently.

[Bioware-Critic]

I have seen Sera get a substantial amount of hate. I just want to know why you hate her. Personally, I love her. She's crazy. I like crazy. 

I think it is more frustration and confusion than actuall hatred.

Sera confuses me! I don't understand half of what she is saying ... and when I understand her it does not make any sense - at all!

She talks like a moron. She is nuts, fine. Who cares? She does not make any sense to me - that is my gripe with her.

I would like her for being nuts - if I could. But like I said: She does not make any sense at all. She is just INSANELY UNREAL!

[cindercatz]

I know it's the topic I just feel like no matter what people post they dislike about her it seems someone(not you just an example) feels we aren't being fair and needs to explain her for us "Well you just don't understand. Sera is this way but you can't see that this is why you are wrong." I mean sometimes you just don't like a person, should we feel bad because people exist that we don't like or something?

Don't worry about it. That's why people come to message boards, right? But to me, debating what's actually happening and how you interpret it is the fun part of the discussion. I like a good debate, though. By all means, dislike who you dislike. It's more an inflection than a choice anyway. Everybody dislikes somebody, even those people that choose not to acknowledge it. I just like to get down under the surface and dissect why, so this kind of thread is fun. Writers like a strong response to a character either way though. Means they hit some nerves with the character, some golden kernel, and that's what you want. Dislike is better than apathy. People can get very defensive about a character, but that's fun to dig into too. I do the same thing about my own opinions.

[Seraphim24]

Sera confuses me! I don't understand half of what she is saying ... and when I understand her it does not make any sense - at all!

 

I think that's her intention, at least, not to explicate everything down to the last detail, leave something to the imagination and all that.

 

Sense is boring.

[elearon]

Sera confuses me! I don't understand half of what she is saying ... and when I understand her it does not make any sense - at all!

 

This isn't the first time I've heard this and it confounds me.  Was she really that difficult for people to understand?  Was it her use of grammar?  Her rambling?  Because I had no problem following her.  In fact, I found her manner of speaking colorful and fun to listen to.

[Todd23]

She is a selfish, close-minded, prejudice, 2 dimensional, ****** who doesn't get that you're the leader... and yet is still the only interesting rogue among your companions.

[10K]

The beliefs and traditions of the Dalish are not "the heritage" of city elves.

I never said Dalish, I said her heritage, meaning elven. When she first meets you and you're elf she has a slight problem with you being an elf. Even while romancing her she even says "I don't usually go for elves. Feels like a...bag of chicken necks." She has an apparent disregard for her own heritage, as I said before, and it's annoying.

[robertthebard]

I never said Dalish, I said her heritage, meaning elven. When she first meets you and you're elf she has a slight problem with you being an elf. Even while romancing her she even says "I don't usually go for elves. Feels like a...bag of chicken necks." She has an apparent disregard for her own heritage, as I said before, and it's annoying.

I get that, and can get behind that, but you're missing some context here: The PC is a Dalish elf. Whether we play it full blown, Creator worshipping, all Shems are bad stereotypical Dalish or not is up to us, the option is certainly there, but the bottom line is, we are Dalish, and it's visibly apparent that we are, for story reasons that go beyond meeting and dealing with Sera. Over the course of two games, we have seen that the Dalish and the City Elves have very different cultures, and very different heritage. The term "flat ear" is not the human term for elves, after all.

[10K]

I get that, and can get behind that, but you're missing some context here: The PC is a Dalish elf. Whether we play it full blown, Creator worshipping, all Shems are bad stereotypical Dalish or not is up to us, the option is certainly there, but the bottom line is, we are Dalish, and it's visibly apparent that we are, for story reasons that go beyond meeting and dealing with Sera. Over the course of two games, we have seen that the Dalish and the City Elves have very different cultures, and very different heritage. The term "flat ear" is not the human term for elves, after all.

I understand Dalish and city elves have different cultures. But they are of the same people, and from my point of view Sera doesn't care. Playing Origins it was obvious that city elf culture was almost as the Dalish when it came to their community and family. City elves are a closely knit society, as are the Dalish. They care about their people. My point was Sera could careless if you were a city elf or Dalish, she dislike her own people period. 

[vometia]

This isn't the first time I've heard this and it confounds me.  Was she really that difficult for people to understand?  Was it her use of grammar?  Her rambling?  Because I had no problem following her.  In fact, I found her manner of speaking colorful and fun to listen to.

 

Yeah, same here.  The way she talks is informal, but seems quite straightforward to me.

[DarkAmaranth1966]

All I get form her is that she hates ALL nobility before she even knows them and, has no concept of taking allies where you can or that the Inquisition being allies with nobility at nearly any cost is a GOOD thing. I recruited the nitwit twice, hate her. Did what I felt once, befriended her second - either way she's a closed minded dimwit that refuses to see the big picture - NO MORE SERA for me.

[hong]

The thing to remember about Sera is that she is no more likely to change her mind than is the average poster in a 50-page thread.

[Ben Gadura]

I despise her ideals. Her life purpose seems to be inciting a class war. Pair that with her close mindedness and you get the typical communist ideologue.

[robertthebard]

I understand Dalish and city elves have different cultures. But they are of the same people, and from my point of view Sera doesn't care. Playing Origins it was obvious that city elf culture was almost as the Dalish when it came to their community and family. City elves are a closely knit society, as are the Dalish. They care about their people. My point was Sera could careless if you were a city elf or Dalish, she dislike her own people period.

They aren't the same people. We've had 2 games where the differences were evident. We had 2 origin stories in the first one to demonstrate just how different they were. But, I have this problem. It seems that by demonstrating that your conception that all elves are simply elves, I can be construed to be telling you that you must like Sera. So, instead of point out that, canonically, all elves aren't the same, I'm just going to have to leave you believing that they are, despite what they went out of their way to show us.